'AYS 


QUESTIONS    OF    THE   DAY. 


(The  numbers  omitted  represent  Monographs  no  longer  in  print.) 
3  —  Our  Merchant  Marine.     By  DAVID  A.  WELLS.     Octavo,  cloth  i  oo 

5  &  6—  The  American  Citizen's  Manual.     Edited  by  WORTHINGTON 
C.  FORD.     Part  I.  —  Governments  (National,  State,  and  Local),  the 


9  —  1 
IO-C 

26- 

28—' 

30—' 

35—  1 
36-] 


25 
ind 

5tO. 

40 
75 


25 

TER 

oo 
0° 

,  75 


38  —  The   Inter-State  Commerce  Act  :  An  Analysis  of  its  Provisions. 

By  JOHN  R*  Dos  PASSOS.     Octavo,  cloth       .         .         .        .     i  25 

39  —  Federal  Taxation  and  State  Expenses;  or,   An  Analysis  of  a 

County  Tax-List.     By  W.  H.  JONES.     Octavo,  cloth    .         .100 


QUESTIONS   OF   THE   DAY. 


40 — The  Margin  of  Profits.  By  EDWARD  ATKINSON.  Together  with 
the  Reply  of  E.  M.  CHAMHERLAIN,  Representing  the  Labor  Union, 
and  Mr.  Atkinson's  Rejoinder.  Cloth,  75  .cents  ;  paper  .  .  40 

42 — Bodyke  :  A  Chapter  in  the  History  of  Irish  Landlordism.  By 
Octavo,  cloth,  illustrated 


58— Politic 

Octa^ 

59 — Monopolies  and  the  People.  By  CHAS.  W.  BAKER.  Octavo,  cloth. 

i  25 

60 — The  Public  Regulation  of  Railways.  By  W.  D.  DABNEY, 
Octavo  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  i  25 

61 — Railway  Secrecy  and  Trusts ;  Its  Relation  to  Inter-State  Legisla- 
tion. By  JOHN  M.  BONHAM.  Octavo  .  .  .  .  .100 

62- — American  Farms  :  Their  Condition  and  Future.  By  J.  R.  ELLIOTT. 
Octavo  ...........  i  25 


WHO    PAYS    THE   TAXES? 

WHEN   THE   TRUNK    IS   TAPPED,    EACH    BRANCH    IS   DRAWN   UPON    FOR 
ITS    DUE    PROPORTION   OF    SAP. 


WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 


A    CONSIDERATION    OF 


THE   QUESTION   OF   TAXATION 


BY 

DAVID  A.  WELLS,  GEORGE  H.  ANDREWS,  THOMAS  G.  SHEARMAN, 
JULIEN  T.  DAVIES,  JOSEPH  DANA  MILLER,  BOLTON  HALL, 

AND    OTHERS 


EDITED    BY 

BOLTON   HALL 

M 

AND    ISSUED    BY    AUTHORITY    OF   THE 

NEW  YORK  TAX  REFORM  ASSOCIATION 


G.  P.  PUTNAM'S    SONS 

NEW  YORK  LONDON 

»7  WEST  TWENTY -THIRD  ST.  24  BEDFORD    ST.,  STRAND 

ftty  linicfeerborker  tyttzs 
1892. 


COPYRIGHT,  1892 

BY 
G.  P.  PUTNAM'S   SONS 


THE  NEW  YORK  TAX  REFORM  ASSOCIATION  is  responsible  only  for  its 
own  platform,  and  for  that  part  of  this  book  which  coincides  with  its  plat- 
form. Many  of  the  arguments  quoted  are  applicable  to  a  part  only  of  our 
programme,  while  certain  considerations  are  presented  which  lead  to  con- 
clusions other  than  ours. 

We  use  these  arguments  only  so  far  as  they  go  in  the  direction  that  we 
think  is  right,  and  we  take  no  responsibility  whatever  for  the  facts  or 
conclusions  stated  by  the  writers.  For  example,  certain  of  the  authors  lean 
either  toward  protection  or  toward  free  trade — matters  with  which  we  have 
no  more  to  do  than  we  have  with  the  work  of  the  White  Cross  League. 

As  we  have  frequent  inquiries  from  other  cities  in  regard  to  the  forma- 
tion of  leagues  similar  to  the  Tax  Reform  Association,  all  who  approve  of 
our  plans  or  platform  are  requested  to  communicate  with  us  with  a  view  to 
facilitate  organization. 

Our  association  is  a  New  York  State  one,  and  we  give  attention  first  to 
our  own  special  problems  and  interests,  but  the  prosperity  of  all  the  States 
is  bound  up  in  one  "  United  States." 

B.  H. 


607537 


PR'EFACE. 

THIS  volume  is  in  part  a  compilation  of  matter 
collected  from  various  sources,  but  the  several  papers 
possess  a  unity  .of  purpose,  and  it  has  been  the  aim  of 
the  editor  so  to  arrange  his  contributions  as  to  present 
a  simple  and  consecutive  discussion  of  the  principles 
upon  which  depends  a  wise  system  of  local  taxation. 
It  is  believed  that  the  reader  unfamiliar  with  the  subject 
of  taxation  will  be  able  to  obtain  from  this  book  a  cor- 
rect and  practical  understanding  of  its  main  principles. 
Various  systems  are  considered;  their  effect  upon  the 
community  as  a  whole  and  upon  various  classes  of  the 
community  is  set  forth,  and  what  is  believed  to  be  a 
scientific  and  equitable  method  is  presented  (unencum- 
bered by  figures)  for  the  judgment  of  the  tax-payer. 
The  census  and  the  various  comptrollers'  and  commis- 
sioners' reports,  with  the  works  cited  in  the  addenda,  will 
furnish  abundant  statistics  for  the  student.  Wherever  it 
has  been  possible,  credit  has  been  given  for  material; 
but  a  discussion  and  argument  of  this  nature  necessarily 
involves  extensive  utilization  of  data  from  unknown  or 
unacknowledged  sources. 

BOLTON   HALL. 


CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER  I.  Changes  Needed.  Bolton  Hall.  Reprinted,  by 

permission,  from  Public  Opinion  ...  I 

CHAPTER       II.     Charity,  Taxation,  and  Pauperism.     Bolton  Hall  15 

CHAPTER  III.  How  To  Do  It ;  comprising  the  conclusions  pre- 
sented by  David  A.  Wells  in  his  Reports  on 
Taxation  in  New  York  State  in  1871  .  .  25 

CHAPTER  IV.  The  Collar-Button  System.  The  Argument  of 
Judge  W.  H.  Arnoux  before  the  New  York 
State  Senate  Committee  in  1884  ...  48 

CHAPTER  V.  The  Cause  of  Business  Depression.  Based  upon 
the  twelve  letters  of  Commissioner  George  H. 
Andrews  written  in  1877,  on  the  future  of  New 
York  City 66 

CHAPTER      VI.  An  Immoral   Way.     Julien  T.  Davies           .         .         81 

CHAPTER    VII.  Robbing  One  Another.     Thomas  G.  Shearman       .       103 

CHAPTER  VIII.  Taxing  Honesty  and  Thrift.    Joseph  Dana  Miller        127 

CHAPTER     IX.  Taxing  Women.      Thomas  G.  Shearman         .         .       148 

CHAPTER       X.  Birth  and  Progress.     Bolton  Hall           .         .         .153 

CHAPTER     XI.  The  Universities.      By  Bishop  Keene,  Arthur  T. 

Hadley,  R.  T.  Ely,  etc 164 

CHAPTER   XII.  The  Press  Discussion.     Bolton  Hall       .         .         .185 


APPENDIX. 

Tax  Reform  Dialogue.     William  McCabe 
Mr.  Little-Thought.     William  McCabe     . 
Rt.  Hon.  Henry  Fawcett's  Argument 
Newspapers  and  Professors 
License  Taxes            ..... 
Note  on  Mr.  Wells's  Report 
Bibliography 


197 

200 
201 
203 

215 
217 
2IQ 


WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 


CHAPTER   I. 

CHANGES    NEEDED. 

Study  of  principles,  the  first  step. — Empiricism  in  taxation.— Its  origin. — 
What  taxes  are  paid  for,  and  what  they  are  commonly  supposed  to  be 
paid  for. — Men  should  not  contribute  in  proportion  to  ability  4  why 
those  who  get  the  most  benefit  from  the  community  at  large  should  pay 
most  for  such  benefit. — A  formulation  of  principles. — How  Mr.  George 
expresses  it. — Evils  of  the  income  tax  and  of  taxes  on  legacies. — Impos- 
sibility of  collecting  personal  taxes. — Real  estate  the  proper  object  of 
taxation. — Mortgages  should  not  be  taxed,  nor  should  the  amount  of 
mortgages  be  deducted  from  assessments  on  real  estate. — Custom  duties 
not  considered,  and  why. — What  should  be  taxed. 

THE  first  step  toward  correct  tax  legislation  is  the 
study  of  the  principles  on  which  it  depends.  Without 
this  we  have  no  assurance  that  change  is  improvement. 
Before  we  began  to  find  principle  in  medicine,  the  science, 
if  it  could  be  called  a  science,  consisted  of  mere  experi- 
ment. Tax  legislation  is  passing  through  the  same 
stage :  without  seeking  definite  and  ascertained  prin- 
ciples, founded  on  equity,  the  law  strikes  now  at  this 
object  and  now  at  that,  as  a  means  of  raising  money. 


s  YOUR  TAXES? 


A.  L.  Chapin !  somewhat  ludicrously  says,  that  "  there  is 
found  to  be  an  advantage  in  combining  different  systems 
of  taxation,  so  that  the  defects  of  one  shall  be  balanced 
by  the  defects  of  another,  while  the  advantages  of  all  are 
secured."  That  is  as  though  a  doctor  should  say  that 
the  disadvantages  of  antipyrenes,  sudorifics,  and  sedatives 
are  such  that  it  has  been  found  best  to  dose  patients  for 
every  disease,  with  a  view  to  combine  the  advantages  of 
all  remedies.  Yet  such  is  the  common  procedure. 

It  is  not  wonderful,  however,  that  taxation  should  be 
of  so  chaotic  a  character.8  It  originated  either  in  simple 
robbery  or  extortion  by  chiefs  and  kings,  or  in  the  price 
of  protection  from  robbery,3  and  as  far  as  it  has  been  con- 
trolled by  any  practical  theory  it  has  been  the  theory  of 
the  blackmailer  or  the  bandit ;  that  is,  to  prey  upon  its 
victims  just  to  such  an  extent  and  in  such  ways  as  will 
leave  the  payees  able  to  respond  to  further  exactions. 

This  is  what  we  might  call,  after  Colbert's  famous  say- 
ing, the  goose-plucking  system  of  taxation.  It  has  been 
succeeded,  in  theory  at  least,  by  taxes  imposed  by  the 
people  themselves  for  their  common  needs.  What,  then, 

1  Johnson's  Encyclopaedia. 

2  "  The  systems  for  raising  revenues  in  the  different  States  by  the  national 
Government  grew  up  under  the  force  of  accident  and  circumstances  rather 
than  as  the  result  of  consideration  and  inquiry."    From  the  "  Report  of  the 
Commissioners  of  1871,  to  Revise  the  New  York  Tax  Laws,"  by  David  A. 
Wells  and  Messrs.  Dodge  &  Cuyler. 

3  Blanqui  :  "  History  of  Political  Economy  in  Europe."    Also  Denslow's 
"Principles   of    Economic    Philosophy,"    Cassell,    p.   452.      McCulloch's 
Smith's  "  Wealth  of  Nations,"  Black  &  Tail's  edition,  pp.  412-414. 


CHANGES  NEEDED.  3 

are  these  common  needs  for  which  we  should  pay  in 
common  ? 

Taxes  are  popularly  supposed  to  be  paid  only  for  pro- 
tection of  life  or  of  property.  This  is  erroneous.1 

Were  they  for  protection  only,  they  who  demand  most 
protection  should  pay  the  most — that  is,  orphans,  women, 
lunatics,  and  the  poor  generally — while  the  city  "  tough," 
or  anybody  else  who  feels  quite  competent  to  take  care 
of  himself  with  his  hands,  should  not  pay  anything.  The 
rich  man  does  not  need  your  protection.  He  can,  and 
actually  does,  hire  Pinkerton's  detectives,  or  footmen,  or 
watchmen,  when  he  finds  himself  or  his  property  in  dan- 
ger. Should  he  on  that  account  be  exempt  ? 

Were  taxes  for  protection,  the  owner  of  a  brickyard, 
which  cannot  be  carried  off,  and  which  he  is  prepared  to 
defend  by  the  aid  of  his  Italian  workmen,  should  not  pay 
taxes.  We  find  in  some  communities  a  state  of  society 
such  that,  owing  to  the  mild  manners  or  religious  feelings 
of  the  people,  protection  is  unnecessary ;  while  in  some 
frontier  towns  every  one  protects  himself,  or  else  a  vigi- 
lance committee  protects  all  who  deserve  it.  Will  any  one 
claim  that  in  such  cases  no  taxes  could  be  fairly  levied  ? 
or  that,  conversely,  he  who  pays  no  taxes  should  have 
no  protection  ?  In  olden  times  taxes  were  based  on  some 
such  theory,  but  that  has  long  passed  by.  Nor  is  there 
any  justice  in  a  levy  of  that  kind,  for  a  costly  marble 

1  J.  S.  Mill's  "  Principles  of  Political  Economy,"  G.  R.  &  D.  Long- 
mans, People's  Edition,  p.  485. 


4  WHO   PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

mansion  with  its  usual  furniture  demands  no  more  from 
the  public  than  a  cheap  wooden  house  does.  Why,  then, 
should  it  pay  more  to  the  public  ?  Clearly  taxes  are  not 
collected  for  that  reason. 

Taxes  are  not  paid  for  protection,  except  in  the  same 
sense  that  the  price  of  protection  is  paid  in  buying  a 
coat.  They  are  a  necessary  condition  of  having  roads, 
bridges,  public  justice,  sewers,  boards  of  health,  commis- 
sioners of  agriculture,  police,  water,  lights,  education, 
harbors,  and  the  thousand  and  one  privileges  incident  to 
living  in  civilized  society. 

Another  popular  theory  is  that  men  should  contribute 
to  the  common  burden  according  to  their  abilities — that 
a  man  should  pay  because  he  could.1  This  is  as  fallacious 
as  the  last,2  because  such  a  tax  is  a  tax  on  abilities,  and 
consequently  a  large  tax  is  a  discouragement  of  large 
abilities,  whether  mental,  physical,  or  financial.  Again,  it 
is  unequal,  since  a  rich  man  is  better  able  to  pay  twenty 
per  cent,  of  his  annual  million  than  a  poor  man  is  able  to 
pay  one  per  cent,  of  his  annual  hundred  dollars. 

1  Wells,  "Second  Report,"  p.  65,  I  to  i,  enunciates  this  common-sense 
and  equitable  principle,  which,  very  curiously,  the  majority  of  those  who 
undertake  to  discuss  taxation  in  the  United  States  wholly  ignore,  "that  the 
public  revenues  ought  not  to  be  measured  by  the  people's  abilities  to  give,  but  by 
what  they  ought  to  give."     "And  what  they  ought  to  give,"  as  has  been 
remarked    by   another  writer,    "  can   of   course  only  be  measured  by    the 
benefit  they  are  to  derive." 

2  "  It  must  therefore  be  evident   that  equality  of  taxation   cannot  mean 
the  taxing  of  people  according  to  their   means." — H.   Fawcett's   "Manual 
of  Political  Economy,"  sixth  ed.,  p.  518. 


CHANGES  NEEDED.  5 

This  idea  is  also  based  on  the  tribute  theory,  and  can 
be  reduced  to  an  absurdity ;  for  only  a  comparatively 
small  sum,  say  not  over  a  hundred  thousand  dollars 
annually,  is  necessary  to  support  life  in  comfort  even  for 
a  very  extravagant  man,  whilst  the  ordinary  banker  could 
spare  little  out  of  five  thousand.  The  man  who  has  a 
million  a  year,  therefore,  if  he  were  to  pay  according  to 
his  ability,  should  be  taxed  nine  hundred  thousand,  and 
the  modest  banker  should  go  almost  free. 

Taxes  are  collected  because  when  men  gather  together 
it  is  found  best  to  divide  certain  necessary  work  for  the 
sake  of  economy  and  efficiency.  It  seems,  therefore,  that 
those  who  get  the  most  benefit  from  this  work  should 
pay  proportionally. 

Adam  Smith  was  the  first  to  attempt  to  formulate  the 
truths  upon  which  a  tax  system  should  accordingly  be 
based.  His  canons  may  be  described  as  those  of  equality, 
certainty,  convenience,  and  economy.  They  leave  out, 
however,  the  element  of  directness,  with  the  good  effects 
which  admittedly  ensue  from  every  man  knowing  for 
what  he  pays  his  money.  They  do  not  sufficiently  con- 
sider the  additions  to  the  amount  of  taxes  put  on  by 
those  who  advance  the  tax  and  really  act  as  collectors. 
The  greater  the  number  of  hands  through  which  the  tax 
passes  on  its  way  from  the  real  payer  to  the  Government, 
the  greater  the  number  of  profits  and  expenses  which 
will  be  taken  out  of  the  sum  paid  before  the  Government 
gets  it. 


6  WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

An  examination  of  the  leading  authorities  shows,  how- 
ever, that,  though  variously  expressed,  Smith's  maxims, 
as  far  as  they  go,  have  "  been  generally  concurred  in  by 
subsequent  writers,"  1  and  that  their  application  has  been 
no  less  generally  neglected. 

These  principles  have  recently  been  formulated,  as  fol- 
lows, viz. : 

1.  The  most  direct    taxation    is   the    best,  because    it 
gives  to  the  real  payers  of  taxes  a  conscious  and   direct 
pecuniary  interest  in  honest  and  economical  government. 

2.  Mortgages  and  capital  should  be  exempt  from  taxa- 
tion, because  taxes  on  such  capital  tend  to  drive  it  away, 
to  put  a  premium  on  dishonesty,  and  to  discourage  in- 
dustry. 

3.  Real  estate  should  bear  the  main  burden  of  taxa- 
tion, because  such  taxes  can  be  most  easily,  cheaply,  and 
certainly  collected,  and  because  they  bear  least  heavily 
on  the  farmer  and  the  worker. 

These  unite  all  the  canons  stated  by  Adam  Smith,  and 
for  a  practical  programme  appear  to  meet  every  require- 
ment. 

The  laws  are  stated  by  Mr.  George  with  axiomatic 
force,  as  follows  : 

The  best  tax  by  which  public  revenues  can  be  raised  is 
evidently  that  which  will  closest  conform  to  the  following 
conditions : 

1  Mill's  "  Principles  of  Political  Economy,"  p.  483.  See  also  Fawcett's 
"  Manual  of  Political  Economy,"  sixth  ed.,  1883,  p.  516. 


CHANGES  NEEDED.  7 

1.  That   it    bear  as  lightly  as  possible  on  production, 
so  as  least  to  check  the  increase  of  the  general  fund  from 
which   taxes  must   be   paid    and    the    community   main- 
tained. 

2.  That  it  be  easily  and  cheaply  collected,  and  fall  as 
directly  as   may  be  upon  the   ultimate   payers,  so   as  to 
take  from  the  people  as  little  as  possible  in   addition   to 
what  it  yields  the  Government. 

3.  That  it  be  certain,  so  as  to  give  the  least  opportun- 
ity for  tyranny  or  corruption  on  the  part  of  officials,  and 
the  least  temptation  to  lawbreaking  and  evasion  on  the 
part  of  the  taxpayers. 

4.  That  it  bear  equally,  so   as  to   give    no  citizen  an 
advantage,  or  put  any  at  a  disadvantage,  as  compared 
with  others. 

From  these  Mr.  George  arrives  at  a  very  radical  con- 
clusion. 

The  changes  proposed  which  seem  to  meet  with  the 
most  general  favor  from  conservative  intellects  are  a 
graduated  income  tax,  a  tax  upon  inheritances  or  upon 
collateral  inheritances,  and  a  tax  on  land  and  on  fran- 
chises. They  should  be  carefully  considered. 

The  income  tax,  although  advocated  by  good  authority, 
seems  to  be  more  proper  as  a  special  or  supplemental  tax, 
where  other  sources  of  revenue  fail,  or  for  special  demands 
like  war.  It  is  open  to  three  objections  :  First,  that  it 
is  extremely  difficult  to  collect  fairly — so  much  so  that  in 
Germany,  where  the  tax  is  laid,  the  proverb  runs,  "  The 


8  WHO   PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

bigger  the  income,  the  bigger  the  thief."  It  is  a  tax 
which  is  more  readily  evaded  by  the  very  rich  than  by 
any  others,  because  it  pays  a  rich  man  to  employ  the  best 
counsel,  to  resort  to  legal  artifices,  or  to  remove  his  resi- 
dence for  the  purpose  of  saving  a  considerable  sum  of 
money ;  whilst  upon  the  man  of  moderate  circumstances, 
especially  those  on  a  salary  or  having  a  fairly  definite 
professional  income,  it  falls  with  redoubled  weight. 

Secondly,  even  a  graduated  tax  has  not  that  justice 
which  appears  on  its  face.  For  a  poor  man  with  a  large 
family  to  pay  anything  out  of  an  income  which  barely 
supports  him  is  more  of  a  hardship  than  for  a  wealthy 
man,  who  has  only  himself  to  care  for,  to  pay  a  large 
proportion  out  of  his  superfluity.  In  order  to  impose 
anything  like  equal  burdens,  an  income  tax  should  be 
graduated  with  reference  not  only  to  the  amount  of  in- 
come, but  to  the  amount  of  necessary  expenditures,  and 
consequently  with  reference  also  to  the  social  position  of 
the  individual.  Thus,  a  butcher's  foreman  with  fifteen 
hundred  dollars  a  year,  who  lives  as  butcher's  foremen 
and  men  of  the  laboring  class  usually  do,  would  find  a  tax 
upon  his  income  far  less  burdensome  than  the  small 
merchant  who  makes  fifteen  hundred  dollars'  profit,  but 
whose  mode  of  living  and  dress,  from  the  nature  of  his 
occupation,  necessarily  involves  a  much  larger  expendi- 
ture. But  such  graduation  would  be  impossible. 

Thirdly,  an  income  tax  is  paid,  if  paid  at  all,  entirely 
out  of  savings.  It  tends  to  discourage  frugality,  and  to 


CHANGES  NEEDED.  g 

undo  the  very  work  on  which  we  have  spent  so  much 
trouble  in  establishing  a  savings  bank  system.  All  pro- 
posals for  a  graduated  income  tax  necessarily  provide  for 
the  exemption  of  incomes  under  a  certain  amount,  for  it 
would  not  pay  to  collect  a  tax  on  a  laborer's  wages.  If, 
in  order  to  remedy  this,  its  payment  be  made  a  condition 
of  the  suffrage,  it  opens  a  wide  door  for  corruption  ;  and, 
if  not  so  constructed,  such  a  system  would  exempt  the 
greater  part  of  the  public  from  all  share  in  the  public 
burdens. 

"  It  is  to  be  feared,  therefore,  that  the  fairness  which 
belongs  to  the  principle  of  an  income  tax  cannot  be 
made  to  attach  to  it  in  practice."  (Mill's  "  Principles  of 
Political  Economy,"  p.  555.)  l 

Now,  as  to  the  inheritance  tax :  that  is  an  occasional 
and  uncertain  duty,  like  the  old  aids,  reliefs,  and  ward- 
ships, and  the  effect  of  it  is,  like  that  of  other  taxes  on 
personal  property,  to  drive  away  capital.  The  American 
colonies  at  Paris,  Pau,  Rome,  and  London  are  already 
sufficiently  large  for  American  interests.  A  tax  on 
inheritances  violates  the  canon  that  taxes  should  be 
assessed  at  the  time  when  they  can  be  most  easily  paid, 
since  almost  all  estates  are  pressed  for  ready  money,  and 
one  cannot  pay  taxes  with  a  note  or  by  hypothecating 
'•  cat  and  dog  "  securities,  valuable  as  they  may  eventually 
prove  to  be. 

1  For  other  objections  see  Fawcett's  "  Manual  of  Political  Economy." 


10  WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

This  legacy  duty  falls  mainly  upon  widows  and  orphans 
and  minors,  and  most  heavily  upon  persons  of  slender 
means,  because  it  is  more  easily  evaded  by  the  rich. 
Being  impersonal  and  infrequent,  it  interests  no  one  in 
good  government.  It  fosters  extravagance  and  hinders 
the  natural  redistribution  of  vast  estates,  and  that  in 
increasing  degree  as  it  is  made  heavier  on  bequests  to 
distant  relatives.  Nor  does  the  fact  that  a  legacy  is  pos- 
sible merely  by  reason  of  law  justify  such  a  toll ;  for  the 
collection  of  a  debt  is  also  an  artificial  power,  yet  no  one 
would  propose  to  tax  that. 

We  must  seek  some  more  philosophic  changes  than 
these  if  we  are  to  distribute  the  burdens  equitably. 

As  the  experience  of  California,  Colorado,  Massachu- 
setts, and  other  States  shows,1  to  tax  personal  property  in 
any  form  fully  or  fairly  is  utterly  impracticable.  The 
attempt  results  in  an  increase  of  nothing  but  perjury  and 
legal  artifice. 2  If  it  could  be  done,  it  would  be  disad- 
vantageous, and  it  is  now  advocated  by  hardly  any 
respectable  authority.  Even  the  attempt  has  recently 
been  to  all  intents  abandoned  in  some  States.  The  tend- 
ency of  enlightened  lawmaking  is  to  fix  taxes  mainly  on 
real  estate,  and  this  better  conforms  to  the  canons.  The 
quantity  of  real  estate  is  substantially  fixed,  and  its  use 

1  See  Thomas    G.    Shearman's  address  before  the  Joint  Committee   of 
Taxation  of  the  Ohio  Legislature,  January  9,  1889. 

2  "  There  still  lingers  a  feeling  among  the  masses,  that,  if  Congress  would 
so  enact,  this  exemption  of  United  States  liabilities  from  taxation  need  not 


CHANGES  NEEDED.  II 

indispensable  ;  so  that  assessments  on  it  cannot  lessen  its 
amount  or  impair  the  extent  to  which  it  is  used.  It 
cannot  be  carried  away  or  concealed.  It  is  open  to  the 
sight  of  all ;  and  though  its  valuation  is  not  entirely  free 
from  difficulty,  yet,  since  it  is  immovable  from  year  to 
year,  it  can  be  more  accurately  appraised  and  more  easily 
compared  than  any  other  property. 

Its  value  is  determinable  in  advance  of  assessment ;  the 
tax  is  a  first  lien  on  the  property,  so  that  it  has  become 
proverbially  certain,  whilst  the  active  interest  of  real 
estate  owners  in  public  expenditure  testifies  to  the 
beneficent  effect  of  its  directness.  As  to  the  way  in 
which  this  tax  on  buildings  is  distributed,  the  New  York 
Times  well  remarked  : 

"  Everybody  who  pays  rent,  or  who  pays  board  to  any 
one  who  pays  rent,  or  who  buys  anything  of  any  one  who 
either  owns  or  rents  real  estate,  contributes  his  share 
toward  the  taxes  that  are  collected  from  land  and  build- 
ings. The  landlord  who  directly  pays  the  tax  bills  adds 
substantially  the  amount  of  his  payment  to  the  rent 
which  he  charges  for  the  use  of  his  building,  and  the 
amount  of  rent  paid  by  the  occupant  affects  the  price  of 

be  ;  but  if  any  one  will  consider  the  words  of  Chief  Justice  Marshall  in 
passing  upon  this  question,  namely,  '  that  the  power  to  tax  involves  the 
power  to  destroy,'  and  that  if  the  right  exists  to  tax  at  all,  '  it  is  a  right 
which  in  its  nature  acknowledges  no  limits,'  he  will  probably  come  to  the 
conclusion  that  Congress  could  not  delegate  to  the  States  this  power  of  im- 
pairing Federal  sovereignty  if  it  would,  and  should  not  if  it  could." — Tax 
Documents. 


12  WHO  PAYS  YOUR  7 'AXES? 

anything  that  he  may  sell,  whether  it  is  lodging  or  board 
or  merchandise."  (Editorial,  May  19,  1891.) 

This  is  too  self-evident  to  need  discussion.  This  tax 
is  specially  adapted  to  municipal  wants,  as  the  assessable 
value  of  real  estate  increases  in  direct  proportion  to 
municipal  expenditures. 

The  practical  difficulties  in  the  way  of  its  adoption  are 
not  serious.  It  is  not  difficult  to  show  the  farmer  that 
the  accompanying  exemption  of  personal  property  would 
greatly  lighten  his  burdens,  because  he  knows  that  agri- 
cultural land  is  worth  little  in  itself  and  derives  its 
value  mainly  from  the  stock,  crops,  machines,  and  cap- 
ital employed  upon  it.  These  are  things  the  assess- 
ment of  which  the  farmer  can  evade  less  easily  than  the 
trader. 

This  tax  must  be  on  the  real  estate  regardless  of 
whether  it  is  paid  for  or  not.  Were  the  propositions 
which  commend  themselves  to  many  of  our  rural  legis- 
lators carried  out — namely,  to  tax  the  mortgage  too,  or 
to  tax  the  land  and  allow  the  amount  of  any  mortgages 
to  be  deducted  from  the  assessed  valuation — in  the  one 
case  the  amount  of  the  tax  on  the  mortgage  would  be 
charged  over  to  the  borrower,  and  in  the  other  the  city 
speculator  would  pay  simply  no  real  estate  tax  whatever, 
because  he  would  cover  up  his  land  to  its  full  value  with 
mortgages  held  by  his  sister  in  Jersey  City,  his  lawyer  in 
Great  Britain,  or  by  some  one  else  who  was  so  removed 
from  the  jurisdiction  that,  in  accordance  with  the  de- 


CHANGES  NEEDED.  !3 

cisions  of  our  United  States  courts,  his  property  could 
not  be  reached  for  taxation. 

Taxes  on  corporate  or  other  franchises  also  comply 
with  the  conditions  of  the  canons,  for  it  is  unreasonable 
that  one  man  or  body  of  men  enjoy  special  privileges 
without  making  special  compensation  to  the  community. 
This  applies  equally  to  banking,  insurance,  railroad,  and 
land  companies.  But  the  tax  must  be  laid  on  these 
privileges,  and  not  on  the  use  of  them,  nor  on  the  capital 
employed,  nor  on  the  receipts,  else  it  will  have  all  the 
disadvantage  of  other  taxes  on  production  and  on  capital. 
Such  taxes  are  popular,  and  are  generally  recognized  as 
specially  adapted  for  State  and  Federal  purposes,  so 
much  so  that  the  last  governor  of  the  State  of  New 
York  recently  expressed  the  hope  and  conviction  that 
they  would  shortly  be  sufficient  to  defray  all  ordinary 
expenses. 

The  question  of  Federal  custom  duties  need  hardly  be 
considered  here,  since  those  who  hold  that  the  tariff  is 
not  a  tax  at  all,  but  merely  a  means  of  fostering  industry, 
believe  that  it  should  be  gradually  dispensed  with  when 
no  longer  needed ;  whilst  those  who  believe  that  it  is  a 
tax  contend  that,  if  sufficient  revenue  can  be  otherwise 
raised  with  less  expense,  greater  certainty,  and  an  equally 
general  distribution  by  other  means,  then,  being  subject 
to  constant  modification,  it  should  gradually  disappear. 
In  any  case  it  has  nothing  to  do  with  either  State 
or  municipal  government,  even  if  sufficient  for  national 


I4  WHO  PA  YS  YOUR  TAXES? 

purposes,  and  is  somewhat  foreign  to  the  title  of  this 
article.  These,  then,  appear  to  be  the  needed  scientific 
changes :  the  steady  concentration  of  all  taxes  for  local 
purposes  on  local  real  estate,  and  of  taxes  for  other  pur- 
poses upon  franchises  and  upon  the  special  powers  of 
corporations. 


CHAPTER  II 

CHARITY,   TAXATION,    AND    PAUPERISM 

Hidden  causes. — Results  mistaken  for  causes. — Cause  of  poverty  not  in- 
temperance, nor  ignorance,  nor  crime. — Taxation  the  main  factor  of 
pauperism. — The  plan  of  charity.— I.  Difficulty  of  finding  work  aggra- 
vated by  taxation. — Work  scarce  not  for  want  of  land. — World  thinly 
populated. — The  cause  :  overcrowding. — Hardships  of  country  life, 
and  unprofitableness,  drive  men  to  cities. — The  remedy  to  encourage 
production  of  wealth. — Source  of  wealth. — Taxes  oppress  the  poor. — 
Rustic  occupations  would  draw  off  surplus  ;  raise  wages  according  to 
their  law. — II.  Overcrowding. — Its  effects. — Charities  only  increase 
it. — Fresh  air  funds. — Horrors  of  tenements. — Model  tenements  but 
increase  them. — Soup  kitchens  reduce  rate  of  wages. — These  are  a  part 
of  charity;  no  line  of  demarcation. — Remit  fines  by  taxing  real  estate 
only. — And  make  country  life  attractive. — This  is  not  socialism. —  Com- 
petition necessary. — Only  abolish  bad  laws. — Education  as  a  remedy. — 
The  Gospel. — If  so,  charity  wrong. — Lazy  charity.  —Personal  responsi- 
bility.— Its  consequence. 

THE  following  discussion  of  the  effect  of  taxation  upon 
pauperism  shows  how  social  evils  are  at  least  aggravated 
by  present  systems  of  taxation* 

Unphilosophical  persons  look  for  causes  in  those  things 
which  present  themselves  most  forcibly  to  the  mind, 
ignoring  the  hidden  but  persistent  conditions  which  have, 
in  truth,  produced  the  phenomena  They  attribute  the 
rain-storm  to  the  thunder-clap,  overlooking  the  natural 


!6  WHO   PAYS    YOUR   TAXES? 

processes  which  really  and  alone  produce  the  rain.  So, 
too,  with  pauperism.  Various  societies  seek  its  cause  in 
intemperance,  ignorance,  immorality,  or  crime,  and  refuse 
to  consider  that  these  things  are  themselves  mainly  the 
result  of  social  conditions. 

Of  these  social  conditions,  taxes  and  the  laws  are  the 
chief  factors.  Drunkenness  is  not  a  cause ;  it  is  not 
natural  to  ordinary  men  any  more  than  dirt  and  disease 
are.  Poor,  dirty,  and  intemperate  !  Can  ten  persons  in 
one  room  be  clean  ?  Can  a  girl  be  modest  in  such  a 
state  ?  What  relaxation  or  excitement  can  a  car-driver 
or  a  sweat-shop  tailor  get  except  by  drinking?  Where 
are  the  clubs  of  the  tenement  houses  but  in  the  rum- 
shops? 

Ignorance  is  not  a  cause :  how  can  a  child  who  must 
go  to  work  at  seven  years  of  age  be  other  than  ignorant  ? 
Even  wickedness  is  more  an  effect  than  a  cause.  How 
can  a  girl  grow  up  pure  in  a  room  with  five  families? 
How  can  a  starving  man  keep  honest  ?  The  wonder  is 
not  that  men  are  so  wicked,  but  so  virtuous. 

Excessive  taxation,  injudiciously  laid,  has  made  indo- 
lent paupers  of  the  Turks,  who  were  once  a  nation  so 
vigorous  as  to  overrun  Europe.  It  has  made  paupers  of 
the  mild  East  Indians,  whose  tendencies  are  so  good  that 
crime  is  hardly  a  factor.  It  has  pauperized  Spain,  a 
nation  deeply  imbued  with  religion.  It  has  pauperized 
Italy,  the  successor  and  descendant  of  the  mighty  empire 
of  Rome.  It  has  pauperized  even  the  Protestants  of 


CHARITY,    TAXATION,  AND  PAUPERISM.  \j 

Scotland,  and  driven  the  Germans  in  great  hordes  from 
their  fatherland.  It  breeds  pauperism  in  every  civilized 
country.  It  is  the  continual  dropping  that  wears  away 
the  stone,  and  if  we  would  save  the  structure  we  must 
find  means  to  arrest  the  causes  of  decay.1 

It  is  not  to  be  inferred  that  all  charity  should  be  dis- 
continued until  we  can  amend  the  tax  laws,  any  more 
than  we  should  discontinue  the  dams  and  reservoirs 
intended  to  regulate  freshets  which  result  only  from 
stripping  the  country  of  trees.  While  the  trees  are 
growing,  these  things  are  indispensable.  But  the  rem- 
edy for  an  irregular  water-supply  is  the  restoration 
of  the  trees ;  the  remedy  for  a  wrong  distribution  of 
wealth  is  the  restoration  of  justice. 

I.  Every  practical  worker  knows  that  the  first  diffi- 
culty in  dealing  with  pauperism  is  to  find  continuous 
and  profitable  employment  for  the  poor.  For  profitable 
employment,  three  things  are  necessary:  encouragement 
to  work,  profitable  work  to  be  done,  and  a  proper  place 
to  live  while  doing  it.  Our  present  system  of  taxation 
militates  against  all  these  conditions.  Taxes  laid  upon 
personal  property  tend  to  discourage  the  production  of 
it — as  the  dog  tax  was,  in  fact,  intended  to  lessen  the 

1  "  So  exorbitant  were  these  taxes  that  the  husbandmen  found  it  to  their 
interest  to  let  their  fields  lie  uncultivated,  as  the  burdens  increased  in  a 
greater  proportion  to  the  produce  than  their  profits.  Hence  the  agriculture 
of  the  Roman  provinces  was  almost  ruined,  and  the  rural  population,  which 
keeps  pace  with  plenty,  gradually  diminished."  Tyler's  History,  Book  5, 
ch.  iii.,  p.  515. 
2 


1 8  WHO  PAYS    YOUR  TAXES'- 

number  of  dogs.  They  lessen  the  amount  of  work,  and 
finally  they  so  crowd  the  cities  as  to  make  moral  and 
physical  health  impossible  for  the  worker. 

Since  only  labor  and  land  are  necessary  for  work,  and 
both  are  present,  we  must  look  for  the  reason  why  one  is 
not  applied  to  the  other.  To  begin  with  land  :  it  is  not 
that  the  earth  is  not  big  enough.  It  is  calculated  that 
Europe  has  a  population  of  but  one  to  every  seven  acres ; 
Nwth  and  South  America,  one  to  eighty  acres ;  and  even 
Asia,  but  one  man  to  about  thirteen  acres.1  It  is  not  that 
the  earth  is  all  used,  but  that,  in  addition  to  the  neces- 
sary rent,  or  to  the  interest  on  its  cost,  agricultural  land 
will  not  ordinarily  yield  any  taxes  whatever  and  leave 
the  worker  more  than  a  bare  living.  Nor  is  the  field 
alluring  to  labor.  At  the  best,  the  life  of  a  farmer  is  an 
unattractive  one.  There  is  no  eight-hour  day  for  him. 
His  work  is  from  sun  to  sun,  and  his  wife's  work  is  pro- 
verbially never  done.  His  situation  is  isolated.  He  is 
largely  cut  off  from  society ;  and  it  is  not  possible,  at  the 
average  wages  of  a  farm  laborer — not  over  twenty  dollars 
a  month  and  his  own  board  during  eight  months  of  the 
year — that  he  should  support  even  a  small  family  and 
make  any  saving  at  all.  This  it  is  that  leads  to  the  over- 
crowding of  cities.  This  it  is  that  brings  a  continuous 
stream  of  the  most  energetic  into  our  great  centres 
of  population  ;  and  this  stream,  notwithstanding  all  our 

1  The  whole  population  of  the  globe  could  go  into  the  State  of  Texas,  and 
have  less  than  ten  to  the  acre. 


CHARITY,    TAXATION.  AND  PAUPERISM.  19 

damming  and  bailing  out,  will  continue  to  overflow  us, 
until  we  relieve  the  farmer  from  taxes  upon  what  he 
produces  and  upon  what  he  consumes,  and  make  it  pos- 
sible for  him  to  accumulate  a  competence. 

We  must  encourage  the  production  of  wealth,  if  we  are 
to  alleviate  poverty. 

Now,  all  wealth,  and  even  all  capital,  comes  from  labor 
exercised  upon  land  or  upon  other  natural  opportuni- 
ties ;  and,  as  the  resources  of  nature  are  practically^ 
fixed  quantity,  any  increase  of  actual  wealth  must  come 
from  labor.  All  economists  are  agreed  that  taxes  upon 
raw  materials  or  upon  labor  are  added,  and  added  with  a 
profit,  to  the  price  of  the  goods  produced.  These  prices, 
so  increased,  are  paid  by  the  consumers  of  the  goods — 
the  workers,  whose  work  upon  the  land  is  the  source  of 
wealth. 

Nor  are  these  taxes  an  insignificant  factor.  A  saving 
of  a  hundred  dollars  of  taxes  per  year  will  make  a 
farmer's  family  rich  and  independent  at  the  end  of 
forty  years.  The  little  burden  is  heavy  for  the  little 
man.1 

But  it  may  be  said  that,  were  the  life  made  ever  so 
profitable  and  attractive,  we  could  not  all  be  farmers. 
We  do  not  need  to  be :  farming  is  but  one  form  of  rustic 


1  The  land  tax,  the  poll  tax,  the  best  tithes  of  the  produce  for  the  priest, 
twentieths,  military  service,  taxes  on  consumption,  labor  on  the  highways, 
crushed  the  peasantry. — Reign  of  Louis  XVI.,  Bancroft's  U.S.,  vol.  vii., 
ch.  7. 


2O  WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

work.  There  is  stone  breaking,  sand  digging,  wood 
cutting,  coal  mining,  barn  building,  excavating,  filling  in, 
lime  and  charcoal  burning,  marl  mining,  sheep  keeping, 
stone  cutting,  quarrying,  brickmaking,  seaweed  gather- 
ing, oyster  catching,  fishing,  clam  digging,  and  you  can 
think  of  a  thousand  other  occupations  using  nothing  but 
bare  land,  which,  were  they  only  unimpeded  by  taxes  and 
restrictions,  would  drain  off  a  portion  of  our  urban  popu- 
lation. Such  a  drain  would  raise  wages,  and,  strange  as 
it  may  appear,  raise  them  without  increasing  the  cost  of 
living,  and  at  the  same  time  it  would  increase  produc- 
tion. For  the  law  of  wages  is  this  :  Ten  jobs  with  eleven 
men  bring  down  the  wages  by  competition  ;  eleven  jobs 
with  ten  laborers  raise  wages  by  the  same  rule.  But 
increased  production  increases  the  supply  of  goods;  and 
when  the  supply  is  large,  competition  always  reduces 
the  prices  of  commodities. 

II.  The  great  problem,  then,  is  to  check  the  increase 
of  population  in  the  cities,  which  makes  morality  and 
decency  almost  impossible.  As  long  as  that  exists,  char- 
ity cannot  do  its  full  work,  nor  do  it  effectively.  We  may 
establish  numberless  fresh  air  funds,  yet  the  children  con- 
tinue to  live  and  die  like  rats  in  a  sewer.  If  they  do 
revive  some  of  the  little  ones  and  bring  fresh  life  and 
health  for  a  year,  what  is  the  effect  ?  Still  further  to  in- 
crease population  in  the  cities,  to  make  work  still  scarcer 
and  bread  still  dearer.  We  may  take  them  permanently 
to  the  country :  others  are  born  and  live  to  take  their 


CHARITY,    TAXATION,  AND  PAUPERISM.  2l 

places.  It  is  draining  a  sea  ;  such  measures  can  reach,  at 
best,  but  a  small  portion  of  the  population.  It  is  said 
that  the  Tribune  Fresh  Air  Fund  has  taken  nearly  fifty 
thousand  children  out  for  two  weeks  each  in  the  last  five 
years.  Suppose  the  other  funds  have  done  as  much ;  what 
is  it?  One  in  three  dies  in  spite  of  all  this.  If  their 
deaths  were  all,  we  might  pass  it  over ;  but  think  of  the 
slow  tortures  of  the  mother  who  watches,  who  knows  that 
good  air  and  food  are  the  only  medicines  needed,  but  that 
they  cannot  be  had.  Think  of  the  children  who  do  not 
die  ;  who  live,  crippled,  scrofulous,  stunted,  miserable,  un- 
clean, vicious — the  results  of  overcrowding.1  We  may 
build  model  tenements,  but  we  only  make  city  life  more 
attractive  and  induce  still  further  overcrowding.  We  may 
pull  down  old  rookeries,  but  the  people  in  them  must  still 
further  overcrowd  the  adjoining  houses.  We  may  fur- 
nish free  eating-houses  and  coffee-houses,  we  may  have 
soup-kitchens  and  various  means  of  relief,  but,  so  long  as 
we  have  the  glut  of  the  labor  market,  we  but  make  living 
cheaper,  and  enable  the  workman  to  offer  his  services  in 
competition  for  what  will  afford  him  a  bare  and  degrad- 
ing means  of  keeping  body  and  soul  together.  Nay, 
we  bring  in  more  people  willing  to  work,  to  marry,  and 
raise  up  children — or,  God  help  them !  to  raise  up  children 
without  marrying — because  when  work  or  wages  fail, 

1  In  1891  the  Bureau  of  Vital  Statistics  reported  that  there  were  in  New 
York  City  nearly  150,000  children  under  five  years  of  age  living  in  tene- 
ments. 


22  WHO   PAYS   YOUR    TAXES? 

they  have  the  soup-kitchens.  For  where  there  are  more 
workers  than  can  be  employed,  they  must  bid  against 
each  other  for  the  work,  and  they  will  get  the  job  who 
can  exist  upon  the  least  pay. 

We  cannot  shut  our  eyes  to  these  things  by  thinking 
of  charity.  The  lines  of  charity  run  close  to  the  lines  of 
sociology.  Prisons  should  be  well  conducted,  and  pris- 
oners treated  humanely  :  that  is  political  reform.  The 
prisoner  should  be  taken  care  of  when  he  leaves  till  he 
can  get  work :  that  is  charity.  Women  should  not  be 
barred  from  the  privileges  and  wages  of  men :  that  is 
politics.  But  to  set  women  to  compete  with  the  wages 
of  men  in  an  overstocked  labor  market  piles  yet  harder 
work  upon  the  hands  of  charity :  that  is  economics. 
One  thing  affects  the  other.  When  we  make  foolish 
laws,  we  find  that  we  have  to  provide  hospitals,  dispen- 
saries, asylums,  homes,  refuges,  meals — free,  and  at  an 
enormous  expense,  and  all  to  do  those  things  which  men 
would  do  of  themselves,  and  do  under  healthier  condi- 
tions, did  we  but  let  them  alone  and  leave  to  them  the 
sums  which  we  now  take  from  them  in  taxes. 

We  must  remit  the  fines  for  giving  work — fines  which 
we  call  taxes  upon  productive  capital.  We  must  remit 
the  fines  for  doing  work — fines  which  we  call  the  farmers' 
taxes.  Remit  all  the  taxes  on  personal  property,  which 
only  the  farmer  pays — pays  because  he  alone  cannot  hide 
his  personal  property,  which  consists  of  cattle  or  ma- 
chines or  crops — but  which  are  a  mere  threat  to  the 


CHARITY,    TAXATION,  AND  PAUPERISM.  23 

owner  of  notes  or  bonds  or  diamonds,  because  these 
things  are  easily  concealed. 

Raise  the  revenues  by  taxing  real  estate,  which  is  very 
valuable  in  the  cities  and  of  little  worth  in  the  country. 
Tax  only  what  everybody  uses,  what  all  can  see,  what 
any  one  can  value.  If  we  would  keep  people  away  from 
the  towns,  we  must  make  life  in  the  country  less  burden- 
some, and  work  in  the  country  more  remunerative. 

III.  This  tax  on  real  estate  alone,  is  no  socialistic 
scheme.  It  is  not  proposed  to  abolish  all  poverty  by  a 
reform  which  consists  in  ceasing  to  tax  the  very  poorest 
out  of  the  small  earnings  which  they  might  otherwise 
save.  Nor  is  it  a  plan  to  do  away  with  competition. 
Competition  with  its  great  rewards  and  fearful  punish- 
ments, which  make  men  do  their  best,  is  necessary  and 
inevitable.  Harsh  as  the  law  of  the  survival  of  the  fittest 
may  appear,  it  is  a  law.  Much,  however,  of  involun- 
tary poverty  is  the  result  of  unwise  and  cramping  laws, 
and  may  be  and  should  be  alleviated  by  repealing  such 
laws,  not  by  making  new  ones. 

Many  will  not  agree  to  this,  thinking  that  education  is 
the  sovereign  remedy :  so  it  may  be,  in  the  long  run  ;  but, 
for  the  present,  education  but  makes  a  less  contented 
man  or  a  more  dangerous  criminal. 

Many  religious  persons  think  that  nothing  but  the 
Gospel  will  help ;  that  all  poverty  is  due  to  original  sin ; 
that  God's  grace  is  the  sole  relief.  And  this  seems  to  be 
the  view  taken  in  the  Pope's  recent  Encyclical  on  Labor. 


24  WHO   PAYS   YOUR   TAXES? 

If  that  be  true,  we  should  refrain  entirely  from  charities, 
lest  we  should  seem  to  war  with  God.  But  the  people 
give  a  truer  answer :  we  must  work  with  God ;  we  must 
practice  charity  intelligently.  When  we  see  a  wretched 
beggar,  it  is  easy  to  give  him  a  penny  to  still  our  own 
conscience,  and  to  go  away  with  a  false  and  degrading 
sense  of  virtue.  We  have  done  no  good.  Our  duty  is 
to  look  him  up,  to  look  after  him,  even  to  expose  him  if 
necessary.  But  to  many  of  us,  that  is  impracticable. 
Then,  we  must  organize,  and  attack  the  roots  of  the  evil. 
Do  not  pass  this  by,  thinking  it  is  a  matter  for  those 
who  study  political  economy  to  decide.  The  community 
lays  the  taxes ;  you  are  a  part  of  the  community.  If  the 
taxes  are  not  just,  they  are  unjust.  If  they  are  unjust, 
they  are  theft — for  which  you  are  partly  responsible. 
You  cannot  shirk  this  responsibility,  standing  by,  con- 
senting to  the  death  of  those  whom  thieves  strip.  There 
is  a  terrible  sense,  as  well  as  a  tender  sense,  in  which  it 
will  be  said,  "  Inasmuch  as  ye  have  done  it  unto  one  of 
the  least  of  these  my  brethren,  ye  have  done  it  unto 
Me." 


CHAPTER  III.1 

HOW    TO    DO     IT. 

A  popular  vote  against  taxing  personal  property. — The  Linson  bill  of 
1891,  and  what  its  effect  would  have  been. — Effect  of  taxing  indebted- 
ness.— Examples. — Taxing  capital  drives  it  away. — Injury  of  this. — 
Self-imposed  restrictions  to  successful  competition. — To  tax  loans  is 
to  tax  the  borrower. — This  is  from  the  nature  of  things. — The  effect  of 
this  on  financial  institutions. — The  Chamber  of  Commerce  took  this 
ground. — The  law  on  taxing  fictitious  property  tried. — How  the  tax  is 
shifted. — Charged  over  with  a  profit. —  Unavoidable. — How  personal 
property  escapes. — The  mortgageor  protects  his  money. — Still  the  "hay- 
seed" will  try  to  catch  it. — His  success. — Poll  taxes. — The  conclusion  of 
the  State  commissioners. — A  better  way. — Tax  real  estate  rental  values, 
which  are  an  indication  of  wealth,  better  than  income  tax. — Indorsed 
by  Mill. — Personal  property  causes  these  values. — Application  in  New 
York  State. — Effects. — Would  relieve  rural  communities. — Clever  to  get 
cheated. — All  will  contribute. — Should  not  contribute  twice. — Objec- 
tions answered. — How  our  present  way  affects  builders. — How  to 
assess. — Assessors'  oaths. 

ONLY  one  who  is  in  close  touch  with  the  farmers  can 
realize  how  deadly  in  earnest  they  are  about  taxation. 

1  The  material  for  this  chapter  is  mostly  taken  from  the  Report  of  the 
Tax  Law  Revision  Commissioners,  David  A.  Wells  and  others,  appointed 
by  act  of  the  legislature  of  the  State  of  New  York,  in  1870.  The  chapter 
gives  the  leading  points  of  the  argument.  It  is  believed  that  every  argu- 
ment is  presented  in  some  part  of  this  volume,  some  of  the  matter  being 
almost  directly  quoted. 


26  WHO   PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

This  subject  could  be  slighted  in  a  young  community 
with  abundant  natural  opportunities  open  to  it,  but  now 
the  increasing  weight  of  the  burden  which  results  from 
more  complex  social  needs  all  over  the  world  forces  it 
upon  the  attention  alike  of  city  and  country. 

The  rural  community  finds  that  it  is  suffering,  even 
oppressed,  and  it  hunts  blindly  but  desperately  for  a 
remedy,  now  in  coinage,  now  in  anti-trust  laws,  now  in 
combination,  at  last  in  taxation. 

It  has  already  once  passed  upon  the  proposition  to  tax 
personal  property.  This  was  under  a  submission  to  the 
people  of  an  amendment  of  the  Constitution,  by  the  act 
of  the  legislature  of  April  24,  1869.  This  was  voted 
upon  separately  and  independently,  with  an  apparently 
full  understanding  that  the  effect  of  its  adoption  would 
be  to  discontinue  the  allowance  of  indebtedness  as  an 
offset  against  the  value  of  any  property  for  the  purpose 
of  assessment  and  taxation.  The  proposition  was  sig 
nally  disapproved  by  a  plurality  of  over  273,000,  out  of  a 
vote  of  more  than  450,000.  The  counties  of  Sullivan, 
Oneida,  Fulton,  Hamilton,  Chemung,  Clinton,  Columbia, 
Delaware,  Genesee,  Herkimer,  Lewis,  Niagara,  Dutchess, 
Orleans,  Oswego,  Richmond,  Rockland,  Saratoga,  Scho- 
harie,  Schuyler,  Ulster,  Wayne,  and  Yates  contributed 
most  largely  to  this  decision  of  the  people.1  Neverthe- 

1  The  Tax  Reform  Association  caused  a  petition  to  be  circulated  in  1891, 
which  seems  to  show  that  at  least  in  New  York  City  the  popular  verdict  is 
still  the  same.  It  is  as  follows : 


HOW   TO  DO  IT.  27 

less,  this  was  the  proposition  which  was  brought  forward 
again  under  the  most  specious  disguise,  in  the  legislature 
of  1891,  under  the  name  of  the  Linson  bill. 

This  bill,  which  seemed  to  have  a  fair  chance  of  passing 
as  a  mere  reenactment  in  that  legislature,  was  the  same 
as  the  existing  tax  law,  with  the  one  exception  that  the 
paragraph  allowing  the  deduction  from  the  assessment 
on  personal  property  of  all  just  debts  owing  by  the  person 
taxed  was  to  be  stricken  out  by  a  slight  amendment. 
What  the  effect  of  this  would  be  is  shown  by  the  follow- 
ing example:  The  merchant  having  $100,000  in  capital, 
and  a  stock  of  goods  worth  $500,000,  would  be  assessed 
upon  $600,000.  Now,  the  rate  of  taxation  in  New  York 
City  for  last  year  was  $1.90:  accordingly  the  amount 
which  the  merchant  would  have  to  pay  would  be  equal 
to  9.40  per  cent,  upon  his  capital ;  in  Albany,  with  a  tax 
rate  of  $1.74,  it  would  be  10.44  I  m  Rochester,  12.00;  and 


"The  undersigned  respectfully  request  their  representatives  to  vote  for 
a  law  in  accordance  with  the  following  principles  :  (i)  This  county  should 
bear  its  fair  burden  of  the  taxes,  and  should  collect  them  whichever  way  it 
thinks  best.  (2)  Stocks  of  merchandise,  money  owing  or  used  in  business, 
should  not  be  taxed,  because  honesty  and  trade  should  be  encouraged.  (3) 
The  consumers  pay  the  taxes,  and  every  one  should  know  how  much  he  has 
to  pay  and  what  he  pays  for.  (4)  Taxes  should  be  mostly  on  real  estate, 
because  these  taxes  cannot  be  dodged  and  are  least  hard  on  the  industrious." 

This  was  circulated  in  a  way  believed  to  be  new — it  was  presented  to 
every  shopkeeper  on  both  sides  of  Third  Avenue,  from  Forty-second  to 
Forty-seventh  Street ;  of  Sixth  Avenue,  from  Thirty-third  to  Forty-second 
Street  ;  and  in  Broadway,  from  Twenty-fifth  to  Thirty-second  Street. 
About  ten  per  cent,  would  express  no  opinion,  but  of  the  remainder  not  two 
dozen  declined  to  sign  it. 


28  WHO   PAYS  YOUR   TAXES? 

in  Brooklyn1  the  percentage  would  reach  15.66,  instead  of 
2.56  as  now.  The  New  York  Park  Bank,  with  a  capital 
of  $2,000,000  money,  and  securities  in  addition  for  more 
than  ten  times  that  amount,  would  be  taxed  upon  all 
these  securities,  making  a  total  of  say  20.9  per  cent,  on 
its  capital.  In  other  words,  such  a  bill,  if  enforced,  would 
drive  out  of  business  or  into  other  States  every  bank  now 
operating  in  the  city  and  State  of  New  York. 

The  withdrawal  of  any  money  from  active  circulation 
in  the  business  of  improvement  of  a  city,  induced  by 
taxation  or  any  other  cause,  is  an  injury  to  its  inhabit- 
ants of  all  conditions  in  life,  whether  they  be  employers 
or  employed,  not  only  depressing  existing  operations, 
but  causing  a  limitation  of  their  extension  and  advance- 
ment. 

If  the  effect  of  an  actual  and  direct  taxation  of  bonds, 
stocks,  or  other  evidences  of  loans,  is  to  drive  them  from 
the  jurisdiction  of  the  State  (as  undoubtedly  would,  to  a 
great  extent,  be  the  case),  then,  it  may  be  asked,  is  not 
the  State  subjecting  its  citizens  to  restrictions  more 
onerous  than  those  to  which  the  citizens  of  any  foreign 
or  some  kindred  States  are  subjected  ?  Is  not  interfer- 
ence with  the  movement  of  capital,  in  the  end  restrictive 
of  development  ?  Is  not  the  State,  in  substance,  saying 


1  Brooklyn  assesses  each  ward  separately  at  a  different  rate,  varying  from 
about  2.42  to  2.63  per  thousand,  according  to  the  amount  demanded  for 
improvements  in  that  ward.  The  above  rate,  therefore,  is  the  average  of 
real  estate  for  1801. 


HOW   TO  DO  IT.  29 

to  itself  and  to  its  railroad  and  other  corporations :  You 
must  not  borrow  money  for  works  of  public  necessity  or 
utility  in  the  home  market ;  or,  if  you  do  borrow,  you 
must  either  directly  or  indirectly  pay  an  excessive  inter- 
est? If  such  interest  is  paid,  does  the  public  gain  any- 
thing? Does  it  not  put  into  one  pocket  only  so  much  as 
it  takes  out  of  the  other,  less  the  cost  of  collection,  and 
at  the  expense  of  frightening  away  its  customers?  The 
prediction  is  often  made,  and  the  hope  indulged,  in  view 
of  the  immense  natural  resources,  the  increasing  wealth 
and  population  of  the  United  States,  and  of  the  west- 
ward march  of  empire,  that  New  York  City  will  become 
at  no  distant  day  the  moneyed  centre  for  the  civilized 
world.  But  this  can  never  be  so  long  as  New  York 
imposes  upon  the  concentration  and  movement  of  active 
moneyed  capital  restrictions  that  are  not  imposed  in 
other  and  financially  competitive  nations.  If,  for  exam- 
ple, a  Mexican  or  a  British  colonial  railroad  or  state 
improvement  loan  were  offered  in  the  New  York  market, 
it  could  not  be  taken  here,  because  the  State  taxation  of 
to-day  would,  of  necessity,  require  New  York  bankers 
and  capitalists  to  demand  nearly  fifty  per  cent,  more 
interest  than  would  be  asked  by  their  foreign  competi- 
tors. Is  it  not  time,  therefore,  that  we  put  an  end  to 
such  predictions  of  our  future,  and  to  such  boasts  of 
what  we  are  going  to  do,  and  rather  set  ourselves  to 
work  practically  to  consider  what  stands  in  the  way  of 
our  doing ;  and  whether,  with  freedom  continually  upon 


30  WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

our  lips,  we  are  not  continually  sanctioning  laws  and 
practices  not  only  inconsistent  with  freedom,  but  ob- 
structive of  growth  and  development  ? 

Business  is  founded  on  credit,  on  borrowing ;  but  to 
tax  indebtedness  is  to  tax  the  borrowing.  If  any  one 
doubts  that  a  tax  on  indebtedness  is  a  tax  upon  the  bor- 
rower, or  the  property  which  the  indebtedness  covers, 
that  question  can  be  easily  decided  by  an  honest  uni- 
form tax  on  all  State,  county,  town,  and  city  bonds  here- 
after issued,  by  making  them  all  subject  to  an  annual  tax 
of  one,  two,  or  more  per  cent.,  and  by  providing  that  the 
tax  shall  be  deducted  at;the  time  of  the  payment  of  the 
interest.  Is  there  any  one  who  believes  that  these  bonds 
will  sell  in  the  market  at  the  same  rate  that  they  would 
command  if,  by  law,  they  were  free  from  taxation? 

We  can  also  test  the  effect  of  an  honest  uniform  tax 
upon  mortgages,  by  providing  that  mortgages  hereafter 
made  shall  operate  to  reduce,  for  assessment,  the  valua- 
tion of  the  land  mortgaged  to  the  amount  of  the  mort- 
gage, and  that  the  mortgageor  shall  pay  the  tax  on  the 
mortgage,  and  deduct  the  tax  from  the  principal  or 
interest  when  paid  to  the  mortgagee.  But  who  believes, 
under  such  a  law,  with  the  legal  rate  of  interest  at  six 
per  cent.,  that  any  money  would  be  loaned  on  mortgages 
in  this  State? 

It  needs  no  argument  to  show  that  a  system  of 
onerous  taxation  of  mortgages  must  have  a  tendency  to 
re-enact  the  Roman  policy,  and  in  time  we  may  thus  see 


HOW  TO  DO  IT.  31 

our  State  cultivated  by  a  dependent  tenantry,  and  owned 
by  a  few  capitalists ;  and  it  ought  not  to  escape  atten- 
tion that  this  very  transformation  has  already  occurred 
to  a  great  extent  in  New  York  City  and  other  cities. 
Capitalists  and  institutions  (except  life  insurance  com- 
panies and  savings  banks,  whose  loans  alone  are  free 
from  taxation)  will  not  loan  on  mortgages,  but  buy  real 
estate  and  lease  it  for  a  term  of  years,  because  this 
investment  pays  a  higher  rate  than  money  loaned  on 
mortgage  subject  to  the  contingency  or  reality  of  taxa- 
tion. The  effect  of  the  present  law,  even  partially  or 
loosely  executed,  has  changed  the  form  of  investment, 
but  has  not  prevented  capitalists  from  obtaining  the 
average  rate  of  profit  of  investments. 

The  experience  of  New  York  in  taxing  mortgages  is 
exactly  what  might  have  been  expected.  Capital  which 
formerly  found  its  way  into  real  estate  mortgages  is  now 
directed  into  other  channels  to  such  an  extent  that,  were 
it  not  for  trust  funds,  much  of  which  must  be  invested  in 
mortgages,  and  for  the  law  which  exempts  the  mortgage 
investments  of  savings  banks  and  life  insurance  companies 
from  taxation,  and  compels  those  institutions  to  invest  a 
part  of  their  capital  in  such  securities,  money  could  not 
now  be  obtained  in  New  York  for  the  improvement  of 
real  estate  on  pledge  of  the  property. 

It  was  formerly  common  to  provide  in  wills,  that  prop- 
erty bequeathed,  or  to  be  held  in  trust,  should  be 
invested  in  mortgages.  This  is  much  less  frequent  now  ; 


32  WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

while  executors  and  trustees  are  forced,  when  a  mort- 
gage is  taxed,  to  change  the  investment. 

In  one  instance,  a  board  of  assessors  frankly  said  that 
their  feelings  as  men  would  not  allow  them  to  assess 
mortgages  according  to  the  provisions  of  the  law,  when 
they  knew  that  by  so  doing  they  would  deprive  depend- 
ent persons  of  almost  their  whole  income.  In  another 
case  it  was  pleaded  that  the  interests  of  a  city  would  not 
allow  its  assessors  to  tax  its  local  mortgages,  since  so 
doing  would  inevitably  restrict  growth  of  land  improve- 
ment, and  since  such  growth  was  absolutely  necessary 
in  order  to  prevent  the  rate  of  taxation  from  becoming  un- 
bearable on  account  of  annually  increasing  expenditures. 

The  New  York  Chamber  of  Commerce,  as  far  back  as 
February,  1870,  in  accordance  with  the  recommendation 
of  a  special  committee  appointed  to  examine  the  ques- 
tion of  taxation  upon  mortgages,  addressed  the  following 
petition  to  the  legislature : 

"  The  Chamber  of  Commerce  of  the  State  of  New 
York  respectfully  petition  your  honorable  bodies  to 
enact  a  law  uniform  in  its  applications  throughout  the 
State,  exempting  from  taxation  all  bonds  and  mortgages, 
and  liens  on  real  estate  when  the  real  estate  has  been 
taxed  at  its  full  assessed  value,  for  the  following  reasons: 

"  First,  The  property,  having  been  once  assessed,  can- 
not be  justly  taxed  a  second  time. 

"  Second,  The  present  mode  of  taxing  real  estate  in 
the  first  instance  for  its  assessed  value,  and  afterward  the 


HO <W  TO  DO  IT.  33 

debt  created  by  the  mortgageor  as  a  lien  on  the  same  for 
the  money  borrowed  and  used  by  him  in  the  purchase 
and  improvement  of  the  real  estate  already  paying  its 
fair  proportion  of  the  expenses  of  State  or  municipal 
government,  is  unfair  and  unjust,  because  one  kind  of 
property  is  thus  compelled  to  pay  a  greater  tax  than 
another  kind  of  equal  value. 

"Third,  It  is  unfair  to  the  development  of  the  real 
and  material  interest  of  this  State,  because  it  holds  out 
strong  inducements  to  capitalists  to  invest  their  surplus 
means,  either  in  United  States  bonds,  which  are  entirely 
exempted  from  tax  by  Federal  laws,  or  in  railroad  bonds, 
State  bonds,  or  on  mortgages  on  property  in  other  States, 
which  are  exempted  by  their  local  laws  from  taxation. 

"  Fourth,  It  cripples  enterprise,  prevents  the  mechanic 
from  obtaining  full  and  profitable  employment,  in  conse- 
quence of  the  difficulty  experienced  by  persons  of  limited 
means  in  borrowing  from  capitalists,  who  refuse  to  lend 
on  mortgage  because  they  are  at  once  taxed  on  the 
amount  whenever,  for  their  own  security,  they  have 
placed  it  on  record  in  the  office  of  the  county  clerks. 
Besides  this,  the  present  law  discriminates  against  per- 
sons residents  of  this  State.  If  they  lend  on  bond  and 
mortgage  they  are  taxed  upon  the  amount,  while  a  resi- 
dent of  a  neighboring  State  can  lend  money  on  the  same 
property  and  entirely  escape  taxation  in  this  State. 

"And  last,  this  taxation  is  really  borne  by  the  debtor 
and  working  class  of  the  community.  It  is  notorious 
3 


34 


WHO  PAYS    YOUR   7 AXES? 


that  it  is  difficult,  almost  impossible,  to  obtain  money  on 
mortgage  at  seven  per  cent,  per  annum,  when  mortgages 
of  undoubted  character  can  be  largely  purchased  at  a 
discount  of  three  or  five  per  cent,  per  annum,  the  capi- 
talist thus  compelling  the  debtor  to  pay  the  tax.  Thus, 
while  the  best  security  known — that  of  a  lien  on  real 
estate — should  command  money  at  the  lowest  rate,  it 
really  has  to  pay  the  highest,  in  consequence  of  the 
operation  of  unjust  laws." 

A  strong  comment  on  the  taxation  of  indebtedness  is 
embraced  in  Justice  McKinstry's  opinion  in  the  case  of 
The  Hibernia  Savings  and  Loan  Company  vs.  The  Assess- 
ors, etc.,  as  follows : 

"  Supposing  that  the  necessities  of  government  re- 
quired a  tax  of  one  hundred  per  cent,  on  all  values,  or— 
what  would  be  the  result  of  such  a  tax — an  appropria- 
tion of  all  the  property  in  the  State,  it  is  plain  that  the 
State  would  receive  no  benefit  from  evidences  of  debt  due 
by  some  of  her  citizens  to  others,  and  payable  out  of  the 
tangible  property  which  the  State  has  already  taken. 

"  The  legislature  may  declare  that  a  cause  of  action 
may  be  taxed,  but  a  cause  of  action  cannot  pay  the  tax ; 
and  this  because  it  has,  and  can  have,  no  value  independent 
of  the  tangible  wealth  out  of  which  it  may  be  satisfied. 

"  It  may  not  be  possible  in  every  case  to  show  that  the 
debtor  has  paid  the  tax  assessed  to  his  creditor.  But 
it  admits  of  mathematical  demonstration,  if  other  prop- 
erty in  the  State  has  been  assessed  at  its  value,  that  the 


HOW  TO  DO  IT.  35 

money  which  shall  ultimately  satisfy  the  debt  (if  it  ever 
is  satisfied)  has  paid  the  tax.  If  it  were  practicable  to 
assess  all  the  property  in  the  State  at  the  same  moment 
of  time,  it  would  be  clear  to  every  mind  that  an  assess- 
ment of  a  credit  was  an  attempt  to  transfer  to  it  a  value 
elsewhere  assessed.  If  a  debtor  were  found  to  be  the 
owner  of  one  thousand  dollars  and  is  assessed  for  that 
sum,  and  his  creditor  is  found  to  be  the  owner  of  his  note 
for  one  thousand  dollars  and  is  assessed  for  a  like  sum, 
and  if  the  day  after  the  visit  of  the  assessor  to  the  creditor 
the  debtor  shall  pay  his  note,  it  is  clear  that  the  same 
value  has  been  twice  taxed ;  since  the  debtor  has  parted 
with  his  money,  and  received  only  that  which  is  certainly 
not  taxable  property  in  his  hands,  and  which  can  never 
afterward  be  assessed.  When  a  debtor  pays  his  debt, 
he  does  not  abstract  or  destroy  any  portion  of  the 
taxable  property  of  the  State  ;  the  aggregate  of  values 
remains  the  same." 

Chief  Justice  Wallace,  in  the  same  case,  says  : 
"  Suppose,  were  such  a  thing  possible,  that  the  entire 
tax  rolls  exhibited  nothing  but  indebtedness.     Taxation 
under  such  circumstances  would,  of  course,  be  wholly  fan- 
ciful, as  having  no  actual  basis  for  its  exercise. 

"  Those  who  possess  capital  not  invested  in  business 
enterprise,  and  do  not  seek  foreign  investment,  can 
easily  escape  taxation  within  our  own  boundaries,  by  the 
purchase  of  United  States  bonds,  Pennsylvania  State 
loan,  and  Philadelphia  city  loan  (untaxable),  or  reimpose 


36  WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

the  tax  on  real  estate  owners  by  investment  in  bonds 
and  mortgages  and  ground  rents,  with  agreements  and 
covenants  that  the  borrower  or  covenantor  shall  pay  all 
taxes  levied  and  assessed  upon  the  principal,  interest  or 
rent. 

"  Most  of  the  capital  at  interest,  held  by  those  not 
engaged  in  active  business,  will,  under  the  pressure  of 
taxation,  seek  compensation  by  flight  or  investment  in 
these  securities,  and  the  weight  of  the  levy  would  fall  in 
New  York  on  capital  in  business." 

No  ingenuity  of  legislation  can  force  the  lender  to  pay 
the  tax  on  the  money  loaned.  It  surely  falls  on  the 
borrower.  If  it  could  be  done  in  any  case,  it  would  be 
in  that  of  mortgages  which  depend  for  their  validity  upon 
public  record.  Massachusetts  has  a  law  intended  to  tax 
mortgages.  The  result  is  that  the  common  form  of 
Massachusetts  mortgage  provides  that  "  the  mortgageor 
shall  pay  all  taxes  and  assessments  to  whomsoever  laid 
or  assessed,  whether  on  the  mortgaged  premises  or  on 
any  interest  thereon,  or  on  the  debts  secured  by  the 
mortgage."  Other  States  have  tried  the  same  thing  in 
various  forms,  and  there  is  some  demand  from  the 
unreflecting  countrymen  that  New  York  should  make 
a  "  horse-high,  ox-strong,  and  chicken-tight  "  legislative 
fence  against  such  evasions.  One  of  the  ways  adopted 
by  the  title  guarantee  companies  to  avoid  such  a  danger 
appears  in  their  ordinary  and  regular  form  of  mortgage, 
which  reads  as  follows  : 


flOW  TO  DO  IT.  37 

"  It  is  agreed  that  if  any  owner  of  said  land,  or  any  party 
liable  under  this  mortgage,  shall  cause  any  holder  of  this 
mortgage  to  pay  any  tax  on  said  land,  or  on  said  mortgage,  or 
on  the  debt  secured  thereby,  or  shall  deduct  or  seek  to  deduct 
from  or  set  off  against  any  principal  or  interest  due  on  this 
mortgage  any  such  tax  or  any  tax  paid,  or  if  any  law  shall  be 
made  in  the  State  of  New  York,  deducting  from  the  value  of 
land  for  purposes  of  taxation  any  lien  on  it,  the  debt  secured 
by  this  mortgage  shall  become  due  at  the  option  of  the  holder 
of  this  mortgage." 

So  that  if  any  such  law  is  passed,  and  the  lender  were 
compelled  to  pay  once,  or  if  there  is  ever  any  attempt  to 
make  him  pay,  lo  !  the  mortgage  is  due  at  once  and  the 
money  loaned  will  take  to  itself  wings  and  fly  to  a  less 
rigorous  climate. 

Will  even  the  audacity  of  ardor  and  ignorance,  fettered 
by  the  constitutional  prohibition  of  interference  with 
freedom  of  contract,  venture  to  suggest  a  countercheck 
to  this  provision  ?  Would  it  not  be  more  reasonable  to 
do  as  many  counties  in  Pennsylvania  and  New  Jersey  did 
more  than  twenty  years  ago — to  ask  the  legislature  for 
power  to  exempt  mortgages  from  taxation  within  their 
own  boundaries,  and  to  find  out  by  such  a  county  option 
law  whether  this  exemption  would  reduce  our  rate  of 
interest  for  mortgages  as  it  did  theirs? 

The  advocates  of  the  "  Listing  "  bills  would  tax  pri- 
marily everything  to  the  lowest  atom  ;  first  for  national 
purposes,  and  then  for  State  and  local  purposes,  through 
separate  boards  of  assessors.  They  would  require  every 


38  WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

other  man  to  be  an  assessor  or  collector.  It  is  not  prob- 
able that  the  work  could  then  be  accomplished  with  ac- 
curacy. The  average  consumption  of  every  inhabitant  of 
this  State,  annually,  is  at  least  $200,  or  in  the  aggregate 
say  $1,200,000,000;  and  this  immense  amount  would  fail 
to  be  taxed  if  the  assessment  was  made  at  the  end  of  the 
year,  and  not  daily,  as  fast  as  consumption  followed  pro- 
duction. All  this  complicated  machinery  of  infinitesimal 
taxation  and  mediaeval  inquisition  is  to  be  brought  into 
requisition  for  the  purpose  of  taxing  "  money  property," 
which  is  nothing  but  a  myth.  The  money  lender  parts 
with  his  property  to  the  borrower,  who  puts  it  in  the 
form  of  new  buildings  or  other  improvements,  upon  which 
he  pays  a  tax.  Is  not  one  assessment  on  the  same  prop- 
erty sufficient  ?  But  if  you  insist  upon  another  assess- 
ment on  the  money  lender,  it  requires  no  prophetic  power 
to  predict  that  he  will  call  in  his  money  and  add  the  tax 
in  his  future  transactions  with  borrowers.  If  a  tax  of  ten 
per  cent,  was  levied  and  enforced  on  every  bill  of  goods, 
or  note  given  for  goods,  the  tax  would  be  added  to  the 
price  of  goods,  and  how  would  this  form  of  tax  be  differ- 
ent from  the  tax  on  the  goods? 

The  conclusions  of  the  commissioners  were  in  sub- 
stance that  we  should  :  First,  Provide  for  the  taxation 
of  all  corporations  created  which  are  in  the  nature  of  a 
monopoly.  Of  such  corporations  the  gas  company  is  the 
type.  It  has  practically  no  competitor  in  its  district,  and 
the  amount  of  capital  involved,  the  preoccupation  of  the 


HOW  TO  DO  IT.  39 

streets,  and  the  certainty  of  disastrous  competition  oppose 
the  establishment  of  other  companies.  Second,  Tax  land, 
exclusive  of  buildings,  at  a  uniform  valuation  of  fifty  per 
cent,  of  its  true  market  value.  Third,  Tax  the  buildings  at 
their  full  market  value.  There  would  be  more  than  suffi- 
cient to  defray  all  proper  expenses  of  local  government. 

Some  advocate  a  poll  tax  of  say  a  dollar,  as  a  condition 
of  voting.  So  small  an  amount  might  seem  to  be  a  trifle 
to  the  industrious ;  but  it  is  hard  enough  to  get  men  to 
vote  any  way,  so  much  so  that  many  propose  penalties 
for  not  voting,  and  we  must  remember  that  many,  even 
those  who  are  indolent  and  sluggish,  may  be  quite  capable 
of  making  a  good  choice  of  a  representative.  They  may 
also  be  poor,  and  that  dollar,  which  is  not  worth  con- 
sidering for  the  millionaire,  may  be  a  real  obstacle  in  the 
way  of  their  exercising  the  franchise.  Whilst  it  is  true 
that  every  man  has  but  one  vote,  and  that  the  vote  of  the 
man  who  has  nothing  may  cancel  that  of  Mr.  Gould,  we 
must  not  forget  that  Mr.  Gould's  wealth  and  position  give 
him  an  influence  entirely  disproportioned  not  only  to  his 
vote,  but  to  the  dollar  which  you  would  charge  him.  He 
controls  thousands  of  votes. 

The  poll  tax  law  is  in  operation  in  Pennsylvania,  and 
by  the  buying  of  poll  tax  warrants  forms  one  of  the  most 
powerful  instruments  of  corruption  in  the  hands  of  the 
machine.  This  subject  is  fully  discussed  in  Ely's  "  Tax- 
ation of  American  States  and  Cities." 

As  for  laws  prohibiting  the  sale  and  buying  of  votes, 


40  WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

with  the  corrupt  machine  and  a  district  attorney  nomi- 
nated by  it,  such  laws  become  dead  letters.  It  seems  that 
the  beautiful  faith  in  the  power  of  conscience  is  better 
adapted  to  the  Church  than  to  the  arena  of  politics.  If 
the  Lord  takes  vengeance  upon  all  those  who  dodge  their 
personal  taxes,  the  city  of  New  York  will  be  worse  off  in 
the  day  of  judgment  than  Sodom  and  Gomorrah  ;  perhaps 
not  even  five  just  men  will  be  found  to  save  the  city. 

The  commissioners  appointed  in  1871  by  Governor 
Hoffman  to  revise  the  tax  laws  of  New  York  assert  that 
they  have  demonstrated  the  inconsistency,  inexpediency, 
and  impracticability  of  many  of  the  existing  laws  impos- 
ing taxes  directly  on  personal  property ;  and  also  the 
uniform  failure  of  the  system  as  a  whole,  wherever  it  has 
been  adopted.  The  answer  usually  made,  however,  to 
any  proposition  to  sweep  away,  as  other  nations  have 
swept  away,  such  a  system,  is,  that  it  is  right  that  all 
persons  and  all  property  should  bear  a  proportionate 
burden  of  the  taxes  necessary  to  the  administration  of 
the  State ;  that  although  what  the  commissioners  have 
alleged  may  be  true,  yet  a  considerable  amount  of  taxes 
is  collected  in  any  circumstances  from  personal  property; 
and  that,  to  the  extent  to  which  they  are  collected,  the 
burden  is  proportionately  lightened  on  real  estate.  The 
question  therefore  is :  Can  the  present  imperfect  system 
be  swept  away,  and  personal  property  at  the  same  time 
be  made  to  sustain  its  equitable  and  proportionate  share 
of  the  public  burdens  ? 


HOW  TO  DO  /r.  41 

To  this  the  revision  commissioners  of  1870  reply 
unqualifiedly  in  the  affirmative,  and  for  the  following 
reasons : 

Every  person  possessed  of  personal  property,  unless 
he  convert  such  property  into  money  and  refrain  from 
all  use  of  it,  affords  some  sign  or  index  of  its  possession. 
What  is  that  sign  ? 

At  the  beginning  of  the  seventeenth  century,  the  same 
system  of  indiscriminate  and  general  taxation  for  local 
purposes  now  existing  in  the  United  States  prevailed 
in  a  greater  or  less  degree  in  England,  France,  Bel- 
gium, and  Holland.  In  those  countries  experience  gained 
through  years  of  practice,  assisted  in  some  by  a  despotic 
administration,  has  led  to  the  conclusion  that  the  rental 
value  of  houses  or  other  occupied  buildings  is  the  most 
certain  index  of  the  value  of  the  personal  estate  of  the 
owners  or  occupants,  and  is  also  the  best  measure  of  a 
citizen's  income  and  ability  to  pay  taxes  that  can  be 
adopted. 

Discussing  the  incidence  of  local  taxation  upon  house 
rents,  Mr.  John  Stuart  Mill,  in  his  "  Principles  of  Politi- 
cal Economy,"  says  that  "  No  part  of  a-person's  expend- 
iture is  a  better  criterion  of  his  means,  or  bears  on  the 
whole  more  nearly  the  same  proportion  to  them,  than 
the  rent  he  pays,  or  the  rental  value  of  the  house  and 
land  he  occupies."  Mr.  Mill  says: 

"  A  house  tax  is  a  nearer  approach  to  a  fair  income 
tax  than  a  direct  assessment  on  income  can  easily  be, 


42  WHO  PAYS  YOUR   TAXES? 

having  the  great  advantage,  that  it  makes  spontaneously 
all  the  allowances  which  it  is  so  difficult  to  make,  and  so 
impracticable  to  make  exactly,  in  assessing  an  income 
tax ;  for,  if  what  a  person  pays  in  house  rent  is  a  test  of 
anything,  it  is  a  test  not  of  what  he  possesses,  but  of 
what  he  thinks  he  can  afford  to  spend." 

The  market  value  of  real  estate  is  always  proportion- 
ate to,  and  dependent  on,  the  amount  of  personal  prop- 
erty, or  rather  productive  capital,  placed  upon  it  or  in 
its  immediate  vicinity.  Land  in  itself  has  originally  no 
value,  as  it  cost  nothing  to  any  man  to  produce  it.  If 
there  is  no  personal  property  or  productive  capital  con- 
nected with  it,  or  reflected  on  it,  it  will  not  sell  in  the 
market,  or  will  bring  only  a  nominal  price.  If  by  chance 
any  buildings  should  be  connected  with  such  land,  they 
will  possess  no  rental  value.  Only  as  personal  property, 
or  productive  capital,  is  brought  in  connection  with  real 
estate  does  its  value  become  appreciable  and  augment. 

Applying,  practically,  to  New  York  State  the  proposed 
system  for  taxing  personal  property  through  buildings  or 
rentals  as  its  representative,  we  should  find  that  the 
aggregate  of  taxation  would  be  the  lowest  in  the  most 
sparsely  settled  agricultural  districts  of  the  State.  Prop- 
erty here  is  mainly  in  land,  whose  low  marketable  value 
would  be  still  further  reduced  on  the  tax  list,  if  a  valu- 
ation of  sixty  per  cent,  were  taken  as  the  standard  for 
assessment.  The  marketable  value  of  the  buildings  also 
is  small ;  and  what  should  be  especially  borne  in  mind  is 


HOW  TO  DO  IT.  43 

that  here,  and  in  fact  in  all  the  agricultural  districts,  the 
value  of  the  buildings  is  usually  much  less  than  the  value 
of  the  land  with  which  they  are  connected.  As  we 
leave  the  sparsely  settled  agricultural  districts,  and  rise 
through  the  more  densely  populated  portions  of  the  State, 
from  the  villages  to  the  towns,  from  the  towns  to  the 
cities,  and  from  the  cities  to  the  great  metropolis  of  the 
continent,  we  shall  find  that  the  value  of  land,  of  buildings, 
and  the  aggregate  of  taxable  valuation  will  increase  as  the 
amount  and  accumulation  of  personal  property  increases, 
until  land  and  buildings  attain  their  greatest  market  and 
tax  value  in  Wall  Street,  Broadway,  and  Fifth  Avenue, 
wh,ere  the  accumulation  of  personal  property  is  the  great- 
est. Starting  at  the  bottom  of  our  scale,  with  the  value 
of  land  greatly  in  excess  of  the  value  of  the  buildings 
connected  with  the  land,  it  is  to  be  observed  that  this 
difference  gradually  diminishes  as  we  progress  upward 
through  the  more  densely  populated  districts,  until  in 
the  cities  the  value  of  the  building  often  greatly  exceeds 
the  value  of  the  land  on  which  it  is  situated. 

Under  the  proposed  system,  the  agricultural  districts 
would,  as  now,  pay  the  smallest  proportion  of  the 
aggregate  taxes,  and  the  towns  and  cities  the  largest ;  yet 
there  would  be  no  injustice,  but,  on  the  contrary,  one 
uniform,  equitable  rule  of  valuation  and  assessment.1 

1  ;'  Land  has  no  real  value  of  its  own  ;  it  cost  nothing  to  produce  ;  but 
since  the  laws  have  endowed  it  with  the  vital  principle  of  wealth  by  subject- 
ing it  to  individual  ownership,  it  can  no  longer  be  obtained  without  giving 


44  WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

Few  realize,  when  they  think  their  neighbors  smart  fof 
swearing  off  their  personal  or  other  taxes,  and  laugh  at  it 
as  a  good  joke,  that,  since  the  aggregate  of  taxation  is  a 
fixed  amount,  every  man  who  swears  down  his  fair  share 
becomes  thereby  an  assessor  of  all  his  neighbors.  What 
he  does  not  pay,  although  he  ought  to  pay  it,  or  what 
he  thinks  he  ought  not  to  pay,  must  be  paid  by  some 
one  else.  Were  this  considered,  most  men  would  surely 
prefer  to  pay  a  disinterested  assessor  of  their  own  selec- 
tion rather  than  to  be  assessed  by  every  dishonest  man 
in  the  community. 

The  attempt  to  assess  everything  vitiates  census 
reports  and  commercial  statistics,  because  they  make  it 
seem  undesirable  for  a  merchant  to  contradict  for  the 
information  of  a  bureau  what  he  has  sworn  to  for  the 
information  of  the  assessor.  Nor  does  any  argument 
convince  the  uneducated  that  questions  asked  about  their 
means  will  not  be  used  as  the  basis  of  a  charge  by  a 
government  which  assumes  to  tax  everything. 

The  Report  of  the  Law  Committee  of  the  Common 
Council  of  Philadelphia,  presented  February,  1871,  says, 
touching  the  incidence  of  taxation : 

"All  taxes  imposed  upon  property,  real  or  personal, 
will,  if  possible,  be  reimposed  by  the  tax-payer  upon  the 
consumer  of  the  article  taxed,  and,  if  practicable,  a  profit 

in  exchange  for  it  an  equivalent  portion  of  the  capital  present  and  designed 
to  concur  with  it  in  the  production  of  wealth." — "Treatise  on  Political 
Economy,"  George  Opdyke,  pages  89-91  ;  G.  P.  Putnam's  Sons. 


HOW  TO  DO  IT. 


45 


will  be  added  to  it.  It  is  cheaper  for  consumers  to  pay 
the  tax  upon  one  than  upon  six  articles.  In  cities,  every 
person,  either  as  tenant,  owner,  or  boarder,  must  con. 
tribute  his  or  her  portion  in  the  taxation  of  real  estate. 
While  absolute  equality  can  never  be  obtained,  in  rating  it 
according  to  value,  the  occupant  of  a  dwelling  valued  at 
$60,000  pays  sixty  times  the  tax  that  is  received  from  a 
$1,000  house,  and  business  contributes  directly  by  the 
occupancy  of  stores,  warehouses,  and  factory  buildings." 
At  present  our  tax  law  is  carried  out  in  this  way :  A 
New  York  builder  buys  six  lots,  say  at  Ninety-third 
Street  West,  for  $10,000  each,  assessed  for  the  purpose 
of  taxation  at  40  per  cent,  (the  average  for  vacant  lots),  or 
$4,000  each  ;  the  tax  of  2  per  cent,  equals  $80  each.  He 
builds  flats  on  them,  costing  for  material  and  labor  $17,000 
apiece ;  total,  $27,000  per  house.  On  this  he  puts  a  profit 
of  10  per  cent.,  which  makes  the  selling  price  in  round 
numbers,  $30,000.  Now,  our  benign  assessor  values  the 
whole  for  taxation  at  55  per  cent.,  the  usual  rate  for  im- 
proved property — that  is,  $16,500  each  house;  and  we 
tax  each  house  2  per  cent. — that  is,  $330.  The  result  is 
a  fine,  for  furnishing  homes  to  a  dozen  families,  of  $250  a 
house,  or  $1,500  for  the  six — nearly  10  per  cent,  of  his 
longed-for  profit.  Even  if  he  is  lucky  and  sells  before 
the  tax  becomes  a  lien,  it  is  considered  in  and  practically 
deducted  from  the  price  he  can  get ;  but  generally  he 
trades  it  off,  and,  having  succeeded  in  that  quarter,  he 
wants  to  buy  the  next  lots.  He  offers  to  take  those  two 


46  WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

at  $io,oco  each.  Oh,  no  !  the  improvements  in  the  street 
(fine  neighborhood  now),  his  own  and  others,  have  raised 
the  price  to  $12,000,  or  20  per  cent,  gross  advance  on  the 
speculator's  vacant  land,  and  7  per  cent,  on  our  apart- 
ment-house. Either  he  must  pay  this  extra  $2,000  or 
make  a  new  experiment  by  seeking  a  new  field. 

The  inaccuracy  sometimes  complained  of  in  the  assess- 
ments of  real  estate  comes  from  the  loose  way  in  which 
assessments  are  made  for  the  purpose  of  taxation.  There 
is  little  difficulty  in  determining  what  the  actual  value  of 
a  vacant  lot  of  ground  may  be,  because  vacant  land  is  as 
staple  a  commodity  (if  it  can  be  called  a  commodity)  as 
anything  which  may  be  offered  for  sale.  The  cost  of 
the  house  also  is  readily  determined  by  the  estimate 
of  any  competent  builder ;  and  if  there  should  be  any 
deduction  for  wear  and  tear,  or  unsalable  character,  it 
should  be  made  on  the  house  alone.  Every  appraiser  of 
real  estate  thus  separates  the  value  of  the  building ;  so 
does  every  assessor — that  is,  excepting  the  tax  assessor. 

In  Massachusetts,  Minnesota,  and  California,  and  in 
some  other  States,  the  land  and  buildings  are  actually 
separately  assessed  in  this  way.  Even  there,  however, 
there  is  some  complaint  of  unequal  assessments ;  but  this 
is  not  from  the  nature  of  the  case,  but  from  the  fact  that 
a  custom  has  grown  up  among  the  assessors  deliberately 
to  undervalue  the  real  estate,  in  direct  contravention  of 
the  oath  which,  at  .least  in  New  York,  is  required  of 
them,  viz.-. 


HOW  TO  DO  IT. 


47 


"  We do severally  swear  that  we  have  estimated 

the  said  real  estate  at  the  sums  which  a  majority  of  the  as- 
sessors have  decided  to  be  the  full  and  true  value  thereof,  and 
at  which  they  would  appraise  the  same  in  payment  of  a  just 
debt  due  from  a  solvent  debtor,  and  also  that  the  said  assess- 
ment roll  contains  a  true  statement  of  the  aggregate  amount 
of  the  taxable  personal  estate  of  each  and  every  person  named 

in  such  roll,  over  and  above  ,  at  the  full  and  true  value 

thereof,  according  to  our  best  judgment  and  belief. 

"  And  every  assessor  who  shall  wilfully  swear  false  in  taking 
such  oath  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  and  liable  to  the  penalties 
of  wilful  and  corrupt  perjury." 

To  correct  such  abuses  would  be  enough  to  occupy  the 
"Board  of  Equalization,"  even  when  relieved  of  the  im- 
possible task  of  estimating  the  amount  of  habitual  per- 
jury in  each  section,  so  as  to  assess  the  full  proportion  of 
chattels  and  land  to  each  county. 


CHAPTER   IV. 

THE  COLLAR-BUTTON   SYSTEM. 

Why  so  called. — Bill  of  1884. — Abstract  of  a  listing  bill's  iniquities. — 
Judge  Arnoux'  argument. — Contrast  between  the  system  of  taxing 
everything  and  that  of  taxing  a  few  articles  of  general  use. — City  and 
country  contrasted. — To  tax  personal  property  would  not  relieve  real 
estate,  and  so  on. — The  Sun  on  enforcing  a  bad  law. — Letter  of  a 
victim. 

THOSE  who  believe  that  the  only  just  system  of  taxation 
is  one  that  seeks  to  lay  the  burdens  of  government  upon 
every  form  of  property,  visible  and  invisible,  have  suc- 
ceeded in  fixing  upon  some  of  the  States  legislation  look- 
ing to  this  end.  Such  legislation  is  usually  called  a  "  list- 
ing bill."  It  has  been  called  the  "  collar-button  system," 
because  one  of  its  warmest  advocates  said  that  he  would 
tax  everything,  down  to  the  cheapest  collar-button.  Such 
a  bill  was  before  the  New  York  legislature  in  1884,  and 
was  bitterly  opposed  by  some  of  the  most  intelligent  men 
in  the  State.  Judge  William  Henry  Arnoux  and  Mr. 
William  H.  Parsons  appeared  in  opposition  to  this  bill, 
April  10,  1884,  before  the  Senate's  Committee  on  Taxa- 
tion. This  bill  was,  and  all  bills  of  this  character  are,  sub- 
stantially like  the  following,  which  was  introduced  in  1892. 


THE    COLLAR-BUTTON  SYSTEM.  49 

It  provides : 

"  That  the  Tax  Commissioners  shall  find,  before  March  i, 
the  number  of  taxable  inhabitants,  copartnerships,  corpora- 
tions, and  associations  liable  to  taxation,  real  or  personal, 
and  report  them  to  the  Comptroller  of  State,  who  shall  fur- 
nish blanks  to  all  taxable  persons  or  parties,  on  which  all 
parties  shall  make  oath  :  What  real  estate  they  own,  and 
where  located  ;  what  debts  lie  against  the  real  estate,  and  the 
addresses  of  the  holders  of  the  debts  ;  the  aggregate  value  of 
each  class  of  all  personal  property  owned,  'wherever  situated,' 
including  money,  deposits  in  banks,  bonds,  mortgages,  promis- 
sory notes,  certificates  of  stock,  book  accounts,  and  solvent 
debts  ;  what  debts  lie  against  the  personal  property  for  which 
deduction  is  claimed,  and  to  whom  they  are  due  ;  what  real 
estate  is  held  as  executor,  trustee,  guardian,  etc.,  and  the 
names  of  the  parties  for  whom  it  is  held,  and  the  amount  and 
owner  of  any  lien  thereon  ;  the  aggregate  value  of  each  class 
of  personal  property  held  as  executors,  etc.,  '  wherever  situ- 
ated or  loaned,'  including  money,  deposits  in  banks,  promis- 
ory  notes,  securities  of  all  kinds,  and  solvent  debts  due  or 
unpaid,  and  debts  owing  by  such  estate. 

"  The  above  statements  to  be  made  under  oath  before  April 
25,  and  to  be  at  once  filed  in  the  Tax  Commissioners'  office  ; 
the  oath  to  be  taken  before  any  officer  authorized  by  law  to 
administer  any  oath.  In  case  of  failure  of  a  taxable  party  to 
file  inventory,  the  Tax  Commissioners  are  to  present  him  with 
a  blank,  which  must  be  filled  out  at  once,  and  oath  taken  that  it 
is  correct.  The  Tax  Commissioners  shall  make  copies  of  all 
inventories,  and  deliver  them  to  the  various  assessors. 

"  The  assessors  'shall  use  the  copies  of  the  inventories  to  aid 
them  more  fully  in  ascertaining,  than  heretofore,  the  taxable 
property,  and  to  whom  the  same  shall  be  assessed.'  (Under 
the  decision  in  Luckmeyer  vs.  Coleman,  New  York  Supreme 
Court,  November,  1891,  they  can  go  behind  the  returns.) 

4 


50  WHO   PAYS  YOUR   TAXES? 

"  In  case  of  failure  to  file  or  make  inventory,  or  omission  to 
state  therein  all  real  and  personal  property,  '  the  assessors 
shall,  to  the  best  of  their  ability,'  ascertain  the  amount  of  the 
property  (personal  and  real)  '  omitted  from  the  inventory  filed 
and  liable  to  assessment  and  taxation  therein,  and  shall  double 
the  amount  thereof  as  the  assessment  of  such  property  for  such 
taxable  year,'  unless  it  can  be  shown  that  the  failure  to  file 
the  inventory  or  the  '  omission '  was  not  done  with  intent  to 
evade  the  provisions  of  this  law. 

"  Whoever  files  a  false  inventory  (of  real  or  personal  prop- 
erty) and  makes  oath  thereto  shall  be  guilty  of  perjury  and 
punished  accordingly  ;  refusing  or  omitting  to  make  an  in- 
ventory will  be  a  misdemeanor,  and  shall  be  punished  accord- 
ingly." 

Judge  Arnoux,  as  spokesman  for  the  visitors,  said: 

"  Mr.  CHAIRMAN  : 

"  With  Mr.  Gardner,  our  secretary,  representing  the 
Board  of  Trade  and  Transportation  of  the  City  of  New 
York,  and  with  others,  I  appear  before  this  honorable 
committee  to  oppose  the  passage  of  a  bill  introduced  by 
the  senator  from  Buffalo,  and  designed  to  compel  mer- 
chants, manufacturers,  traders,  and  others  to  pay  taxes 
on  all  goods  in  their  possession,  without  regard  to  the 
indebtedness  of  the  owners  thereof. 

"  The  true  title  of  this  bill  should  be  '  An  Act  to  dis- 
courage Commerce  and  Manufactures  in  the  State  of 
New  York/  and  such  will  be  its  effect.  The  Board  of 
Trade  and  Transportation  has  a  membership  of  one 
thousand  merchants  and  mercantile  firms,  who  are  unani- 
mously opposed  to  this  bill,  and  who  believe  that  its  pas- 


THE   COLLAR-BUTTON  SYSTEM.  51 

sage  will  be  detrimental  if  not  disastrous  to  business  in 
New  York  City.  The  tax  there  varies  from  2l/2  to  3  per 
cent.  On  a  firm  carrying  a  stock  of  half  a  million  of  dollars, 
this  would  impose  a  burden  of  from  $12,000  to  $15,000, 
the  result  of  which  may  be  inferred  from  a  statement 
made  to  me  to-day.  4 1  am  a  manufacturer  of  gang 
plows,'  said  my  informant  ;  *  my  establishment  is  in  the 
interior  of  this  State,  and  we  sell  our  plows  in  all  parts 
of  the  United  States,  and  particularly  in  California  ;  pass 
this  law,  and  we  will  remove  to  Pittsburgh  Many  of  our 
large  manufacturers  now  find  it  to  their  interest  to  have 
their  factories  in  Jersey  City.  Pass  this  law,  and  the 
number  will  be  largely  increased.  How  suicidal  will  such 
a  policy  be !  We  have  in  this  State  the  most  magnificent 
harbor  on  the  western  coast  of  the  Atlantic  Ocean,  and 
one  of  the  finest  in  the  world.  But  with  such  hostile 
legislation  as  this  that  you  propose,  it  will  be  difficult, 
notwithstanding  our  natural  advantages,  to  maintain  our 
commercial  supremacy.  Boston,  Philadelphia,  and  Balti- 
more are  increasing  in  their  foreign  commerce  more 
rapidly  than  New  York,  while  Chicago,  St.  Louis,  and 
Cincinnati  are  formidable  competitors  for  the  Western 
and  Southwestern  trade,  and  with  every  added  burden 
we  will  be  less  able  to  cope  with  them." 

Senator  MURPHY:  "  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  Balti- 
more, on  a  river  a  hundred  miles  from  the  sea,  can  rival 
New  York?" 

Judge  ARNOUX:  "I  mean  to  say  that  the  foreign  com- 


52  WHO  PAYS  YOUR   TAXES? 

merce  of  Baltimore  in  the  past  three  years  has  increased 
at  a  much  larger  ratio  than  that  of  New  York." 

Senator  MURPHY:  "That  is  because  of  the  terminal 
facilities  that  Baltimore  affords  the  Baltimore  and  Ohio 
Railroad." 

Judge  ARNOUX:  "Exactly  so.  While  we  adopt  a  policy 
of  taxation  that  restricts  and  diminishes  our  commerce,  Bal- 
timore, by  a  wiser  and  more  enlightened  policy,  stimulates 
hers,  and  with  excellent  results.  This  is  the  policy  that 
built  the  Erie  Canal  and  fostered  the  trade  of  New  York 
half  a  century  ago,  which  you  now  propose  to  overturn. 

"  Now,  gentlemen,  this  proposed  law  is  a  step  in  the 
wrong  direction,  because,  instead  of  increasing  the  tax- 
ation on  personal  property  in  general,  it  should  be  your 
effort  to  relieve  it  altogether.  It  is  unfortunate  that  the 
division  of  property  which  the  law  has  made  into  real 
and  personal  property  should  have  been  adopted  in  tax- 
ation, for  the  varieties  of  personal  property  make  it 
unwise  to  put  them  all  in  the  same  category.  Tax 
specific  property,  and  then  you  will  act  wisely.  You 
have  commenced  this  by  taxing  corporations  in  franchise 
and  in  income ;  you  have  followed  that  by  taxing  col- 
lateral inheritances  ;  you  can  add  to  that  a  proper  excise 
tax  :  and  from  these  four  sources — real  estate,  corpora- 
tions, collateral  inheritances,  and  excise — there  should  be 
a  sufficient  revenue  for  the  wants  of  this  State,  if  its 
affairs  are  administered  with  prudence  and  economy. 

"  There  are  two  systems  on  which  governments  proceed 


THE  COLLAR-BUTTON  SYSTEM. 


53 


in  taxation — one,  to  tax  everything,  on  the  principle  of 
making  all  contribute  equally  ;  the  other,  to  tax  a  few 
articles  and  to  relieve  all  others.  Great  Britain  has  tried 
and  discarded  the  former,  and  now  pursues  the  latter. 
Her  political  economists  have  planned,  and  her  officials 
have  put  in  practice,  a  system  that  enables  her  to  collect 
a  large  revenue,  and  leaves  her  commerce  unrestricted. 
As  a  consequence,  the  whole  world  pays  tribute  to  Eng- 
land. Out  of  a  revenue  of  £73,000,000  she  collects  from 
£30,000,000  to  £35,000,000  from  liquors  alone  ;  tobacco 
pays  the  next  largest  share  of  customs,  and  of  internal 
taxes  the  income  tax  is  the  largest.  Recognizing  that 
the  prosperity  and  greatness  of  a  nation  must  eventually 
rest  upon  its  manufactures  and  commerce,  we  can  wisely 
profit  by  England's  example.  The  fundamental  prin- 
ciple there  is  to  levy  taxes  where  they  can  be  certainly 
and  economically  collected,  and  where  the  class  can  be 
equally  taxed.  As  no  tobacco,  for  example,  is  grown  in 
Great  Britain,  none  can  escape  contribution  except  what 
is  smuggled  ;  and  that,  in  the  nature  of  things,  with  vigi- 
lant and  competent  officials,  must  be  very  small. 

"  A  brief  review  of  the  facts  shows  that  the  principle 
adopted  here  is  a  lamentable  failure.  Some  gentlemen 
who  have  preceded  me  have  divided  personal  property 
into  visible  and  invisible  property,  and  a  most  excellent 
description  it  is.  Now,  by  reference  to  the  report  of  the 
Comptroller,  for  the  year  1883,  I  find  that  all  the  assess- 
able personal  property  in  this  State  was : 


54  WffO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

In  the  year  1869 $3O7,349>!55 

In  the  year  1883 315,039,085 


An  increase  in  14  years  of $7,689,930 

"  On  the  other  hand,  from  the  same  report,  the  assess- 
able value  of  the  real  estate  appears  as  follows : 

In  the  year  1869 $1,097,564,524 

In  the  year  1883 2,557,218,240 


An  increase  in  14  years  of $1,450,653,716 

"  In  other  words,  the  increase  in  value  of  the  real  estate 
has  been  over  189  times  that  of  personal  property  in  that 
time !  Is  there  an  intelligent  man  who  does  not  believe 
that  the  increase  of  personal  property  has  not  been  as 
great  as,  if  not  greater  than,  that  of  real  property?  In- 
visible wealth  has  escaped  taxation. 

"  Let  us  make  a  little  closer  inspection.  In  1883  the 
assessed  personal  property  was: 

In  New  York $197,546,495 

In  Brooklyn  (Kings  County) 13&7>$$° 

In  Buffalo  (Erie  County) 10,688,670 


Making  a  total  in  the  three  cities  of  $221,552,715 
And  leaving  for  the  rest  of  the  State     $93,476,570 

"  Only  four  other  counties,  Albany,  Dutchess,  Ononda- 
ga,  and  Orange,  return  over  $5,000,000;  fourteen  counties 
return  less  than  $1,000.000;  and  one  county  (Hamil- 
ton), only  $1,550.  If  report  speaks  truly,  two  men  in 


THE   COLLAR-BUTTON  SYSTEM.  55 

the  city  of  New  York  are  worth  more  than  New  York 
City's  entire  taxable  personal  property,  and  half  a  dozen 
men  in  New  York  are  worth  more  than  the  State's. 

"  The  absurdity  of  these  figures,  as  a  just  statement  of 
the  real  value  of  the  personal  property  in  this  State,  will 
appear  from  the  United  States  census  of  1880,  in  the 
table  of  cattle,  etc.  Assuming  that  the  assessments  will 
be  made  in  the  springtime,  after  the  cows  have  been  win- 
tered and  before  the  sheep  have  been  sheared,  the  esti- 
mates of  value  have  been  given  by  one  of  our  farmers  : 

Horses,  610,358  at  $100 $6,103,580 

Mules,  5,072  at  $20 101,440 

Working  oxen,  39,633  at  $50 1,981,650 

Milch  cows,  1,437,855  at  $50 71,894,275 

Other  cattle,  862,233  at  $20 17,244,660 

Sheep,  i, 7 1 5, 1 80  at  $5  8,575,900 

Swine,  75 1 ,907  at  $4 3,007,628 


Making  a  total  of $108,909,133 

"Without  therein  taking  any  account  of  the  230,- 
000,000  quarts  of  milk,  111,000,000  pounds  of  butter, 
and  8,000,000  pounds  of  cheese,  we  find  the  visible 
personal  quadruped  property  of  the  farmers  exceeds  by 
$15,000,000  all  the  assessed  personal  property  of  the 
State,  exclusive  of  the  three  principal  cities,  and  that  it 
is  double  all  the  personalty  in  the  rural  districts. 

"  Nor  is  this  all,  nor  the  most  lamentable  fact.  These 
figures  demonstrate  that  the  assessors  and  tax-payers 


PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

both  violate  their  oaths  in  the  returns  that  are  made  ;  and 
if  for  no  other  reason  than  that  the  law  debauches  the 
public  conscience,  it  should  be  abolished,  and  some  other 
system  should  be  adopted.  And  it  can  be  done.  Fol- 
lowing the  example  of  Pennsylvania,  New  York  in  1880 
and  1 88 1  passed  a  franchise  and  income  tax  against  cor- 
porations. What  has  been  the  result?  There  has  been 
since  1871  a  steady  decrease  in  the  value  of  personal 
property,  and  there  has  been  no  acceleration  whatever  in 
the  rate  since  1880;  but  let  us  concede  that  the  total 
shrinkage  of  personal  property  in  the  last  three  yearg  has 
been  due  to  the  removal  from  the  tax  assessors'  books  of 
stock  belonging  to  individuals  who  are  now  exempt  from 
taxation  thereon. 

The  assessed  personal  in  1880  was    $322,468,712 

1883    "         315.039^085 


A  diminution  of $7,429,627 

"  Turning  again  to  the  Comptroller's  report,  we  find 
that  corporations  in  1883  paid  $1,935,179,31  ;  and  this 
large  amount,  the  Comptroller  took  pleasure  in  saying, 
has  been  promptly  paid.  It  is  safe  to  say  that,  by  this 
law,  the  personal  tax  is  increased  $1,750,000.  Pennsyl- 
vania realizes  from  its  tax  on  collateral  inheritances 
$600,000,  and  this  State  will,  undoubtedly,  at  the  same 
rate  of  taxation,  realize  $1,000,000.  The  total  amount 
required  by  the  State  is  about  $9,000,000,  and  these 
two  laws,  with  a  proper  excise  law,  will  give  half  the 


THE   COLLAR-BUTTON  SYSTEM.  $7 

tax,  and  real  estate  the  remainder.  Now  all  kinds  of 
personal  property  pay  about  one-ninth." 

Senator  VEDDER:  u  If  all  kinds  of  personal  estate  paid 
its  due  proportion,  would  not  the  reduction  of  tax  on  real 
estate  reduce  the  rents?" 

Judge  ARNOUX  :  "  I  feel  some  diffidence,  Mr.  Chair- 
man, in  presenting  my  views  to  one  who  has  made  such 
a  deep  study  of  this  subject  as  you  have.  I  have  read 
your  able  report  as  one  of  the  State  assessors,  and  I 
fully  agree  with  you,  I  believe,  in  all  your  conclusions, 
except  in  reference  to  this  tax.  I  am  constrained  to  say 
that  it  is  a  step  in  the  wrong  direction.  The  rents  of 
real  estate  are  not  governed  by  the  taxes,  but  by  the 
more  inexorable  law  of  supply  and  demand." 

The  gentleman  from  Rochester:  "  That's  so." 

Judge  ARNOUX :  "  The  best  illustration  that  can  be 
given  on  that  point  is  that  the  price  of  tea,  and  I  think 
of  coffee  also,  largely  advanced  within  three  months  after 
the  tax  was  removed  by  Congress. 

"  I  have  said  that  the  fundamental  rule  of  taxation  is 
not  that  it  shall  be  universal,  but  that  it  shall  be  equal 
upon  the  class.  Now,  this  proposed  law  is  very  un- 
equal. There  might  be  two  merchants  of  equal  wealth, 
one  of  whom  might  pay  ten  times  the  tax  of  the  other. 
For  example,  if  they  were  each  worth  $50,000,  and  one 
had  a  stock  of  the  same  amount  all  paid  for,  and  the 
other  $500,000,  the  latter  would  pay  ten  times  the  tax 
of  the  former.  You  say,  that  would  restrain  merchants 


5  8  WHO   PAYS   YOUR   TAXES? 

from  running  into  debt?  That  is  possible.  It  has  been 
in  former  ages,  and  is  now  in  certain  countries,  that 
merchants  have  no  debts.  It  is,  however,  confined  to 
the  savage  state  of  barter  or  the  semi-barbaric  condi- 
tion where  banks  and  credits  are  unknown.  It  is  not 
considered  possible  in  the  higher  civilization  of  the  nine- 
teenth century,  and  certainly  it  would  be  a  hindrance  to 
all  progress.  Modern  finance  bases  credit  on  a  fixed 
ratio  to  capital. 

"  But  the  difficulty  here  presents  itself,  that  in  conse- 
quence of  this  irregularity  most  men  will  endeavor  to 
escape.  My  associate,  Mr.  Parsons,  for  instance,  will  say 
to  the  assessor,  '  Come  and  see  my  stock,  and  put  your 
own  appraisement  upon  it.'  His  stock  in  his  store  is  only 
a  small  portion.  He  has  storage  in  ten  different  ware- 
houses. The  official  discovers  that,  but  he  has  four  times 
as  much  afloat  as  he  has  in  his  store.  Would  not  there 
be  in  such  a  case  almost  an  irresistible  temptation  to 
evade  the  tax?" 

Senator  VEDDER :  "  Are  you  aware  that  the  law  in 
Massachusetts  reads  as  this  proposed  law  does?" 

Judge  ARNOUX  :  "  I  am  aware  of  that,  and  also  aware 
of  the  results,  which  confirm  what  I  have  said  about  the 
evasions  that  will  be  practiced  under  such  a  law.  The 
date  fixed  under  that  law  for  assessment  is  the  first  day 
of  May.  On  that  day  the  mills  have  on  hand  only  about 
one-quarter  of  the  average  amount  of  stock  they  carry. 
They  sell  through  the  latter  part  of  March  and  all  of 


THE   COLLAR  BUTTON  SYSTEM.  59 

April,  and  contract  to  buy  on  the  second  day  of  May. 
The  railroad  depots  on  the  first  of  May  are  filled  with 
goods,  the  bills  of  which  arrive  on  the  second,  and  the 
goods  themselves  are  removed  as  rapidly  as  possible  early 
in  the  morning. 

"  Gentlemen,  I  can  only  say,  in  conclusion,  that  no 
class  in  this  State  will  suffer  more,  and  more  unjustly, 
than  the  farmers.  They  literally  earn  their  bread  by  the 
sweat  of  their  brows,  and  maintain  their  independence  by 
strict  economy.  Are  you  going  to  make  them  pay  taxes 
on  their  horses,  cows,  cattle,  sheep,  swine,  poultry,  dairy 
products,  grass,  grain,  and  fruit  ?  Will  it  not  be  a  dis- 
couragement to  the  stock-raisers  and  to  all  the  sons  of 
the  soil  ?  There  will  be  no  compensation  to  them  to 
counterbalance  these  taxes  if  honestly  imposed.1 

"  The  real  gainers  will  be  those  who,  like  myself,  have 
their  property  in  real  estate.  We  do  not  now  complain, 
that  is  to  say,  we  have  borne  the  burden  so  long  that  it 
has  virtually  adjusted  itself,  for  so  long  as  commerce  and 
manufactures  are  untrammeled  the  rest  will  so  adjust 
itself  that  it  will  cease  to  be  a  burden.  We  will  not 
reduce  our  rents,  but  we  will  advance  the  price ;  for  when 
the  net  income  increases,  the  value  of  the  property  will 
increase." 


1  In  New  York  the  farmers  do  not  now  in  fact  pay  any  personal  taxes 
to  speak  of.  The  exemption  is  large  for  a  small  farmer,  and  the  assessors 
being  elected,  and  hoping  to  be  elected  again,  do  not  assess  the  personal 
property. — ED. 


60  WHO  PAYS   YOUR  TAXES? 

Mr.  GARDNER  :  "  I  can  give  an  illustration  in  point. 
I  know  a  piece  of  property,  the  assessed  value  of  which 
has  remained  unchanged  for  the  past  five  years.  In 
the  meantime,  the  rent  has  increased  nearly  double, 
and  the  value  of  the  property  has  increased  in  like  pro- 
portion." 

Judge  ARNOUX  :  "You  see,  gentlemen,  nearly  every 
proposition  that  I  have  made  is  confirmed  by  the  facts 
that  others  have  been  able  to  adduce.  I  only  wish  to 
add  that  I  trust  the  views  of  the  chairman  upon  the  Tax 
Commission  Report  of  1881  will  be  accepted  by  this 
committee  in  all  points  except  this  here  discussed." 

When  a  bill  of  like  purport  was  before  the  New  York- 
legislature  in  March,  1891,  the  New  York  Sun  denounced 
it  editorially.  Here  is  an  editorial  article  entitled  "The 
Proposed  Tax  Bill,"  from  the  Sun  of  March  13,  1891. 

"  Bills  are  pending  in  the  Assembly  and  in  the  Senate,  for 
the  introduction  into  this  State  of  the  listing  system  of  taxa- 
tion. It  is  proposed  that  every  owner  of  property,  real  or 
personal,  shall  annually  prepare  an  inventory  of  his  posses- 
sions, swear  to  it,  and  deliver  it  to  the  tax-assessors  for  their 
guidance  in  fixing  the  amount  of  his  taxes.  If  he  neglects  to 
do  this,  any  assessment  that  the  assessors  may  make  from  their 
own  knowledge  is  to  be  doubled  ;  and  if  he  refuses  to  do  it, 
upon  demand,  he  is  to  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and 
punished  accordingly.  Both  the  Assembly  and  the  Senate 
bills,  as  they  stand,  afford  many  loopholes  of  escape,  and 
opportunities  for  litigation.  It  is  doubtful,  indeed,  whether 
any  bill  could  be  drawn  which  would  be  free  from  these 
defects  ;  but  that  is  of  minor  importance. 


THE   COLLAR-BUTTON  SYSTEM.  6l 

"  Perfect  or  imperfect  in  its  details,  the  scheme  is  objection- 
able on  principle,  as  involving  an  inquisitorial  prying  into 
private  affairs.  It  would  violate  the  citizen's  natural  privilege 
not  to  be  compelled  to  furnish  evidence  against  himself.  Ask- 
ing a  man  to  spread  out  upon  the  public  records  a  full  account 
of  his  affairs,  the  property  he  owns,  the  debts  he  owes,  and  the 
debts  that  others  owe  him,  and  to  put  his  business  secrets  at 
the  mercy  of  irresponsible  officials,  is  something  new  in  this 
part  of  the  country,  and  not  likely  to  meet  with  anything  but 
opposition.  A  few  conscientious,  law-abiding  citizens  might 
comply  with  the  demand,  but  the  majority  would  defy  or 
evade  it. 

"  The  enactment  of  such  a  tax  law  as  that  now  proposed 
would  serve  this  purpose,  however,  and  therein  lies  the  single 
valid  argument  in  its  favor  : 

"It  would  bring  out  more  plainly  than  our  existing  law 
does  the  folly  of  trying  to  tax  personal  property  at  all,  and  it 
would  help  on  the  needed  reform  of  putting  all  taxation  upon 
real  property.  What  is  called  personal  property  is,  mostly^ 
nothing  but  interests  in  real  property  in  this  State  or  in  other 
States.  Holders  of  mortgages  are,  to  the  amounts  owing 
them,  joint  owners  with  the  makers  of  the  mortgages  in  the 
land  mortgaged.  Shareholders  in  railroad  companies,  in  man- 
ufacturing companies,  and  in  other  corporations,  have  noth- 
ing but  rights  to  dividends  earned  by  investments  which  are 
for  the  most  part  composed  of  land  and  buildings.  Money 
lent  and  credits  given  are  in  the  same  way  represented  by  the 
property  of  the  debtors,  and  this,  too,  is  chiefly  land  or 
improvements  affixed  to  land.  The  only  personal  property 
which  it  is  reasonable  to  tax  at  all  is  composed  of  merchandise 
and  of  household  goods,  and  the  value  of  these  is  compara- 
tively unimportant.  A  tax  upon  land  and  its  improvements 
is  easily  laid  and  cheaply  collected,  and  would  furnish  all  the 
money  needed  for  public  purposes  without  being  oppressive. 


62  WHO  PAYS  YOUR   TAXES? 

"  If  the  inquisitorial  system  should  be  adopted  it  would 
make  these  facts  so  plain,  that,  with  its  offensiveness  in  other 
respects,  it  would  ultimately  secure  not  only  its  own  repeal,  but 
the  abolition  of  all  personal  taxes." 

This  editorial  utterance  called  forth  the  following  letter 
from  George  W.  Ellis: 

"  To  THE  EDITOR  OF  THE  SUN. 

"  Sir :  The  editorial  in  this  morning's  Sun  entitled  '  The 
Proposed  Tax  Bill '  presents  the  question  thereby  raised  with 
admirable  clearness  and  force. 

"  The  advantage  to  real  estate  owners  of  freedom  from  tax- 
ation of  personal  property  is  appreciated  by  city  owners,  and 
the  opposition  comes  from  the  farmers. 

"  The  farmers  argue  that  the  money  lender  gets  his  principal 
and  interest  easily,  while  the  owner  of  the  farm  works  hard,  and 
cannot  in  recent  years  make  a  profit  on  the  farm  product,  to 
say  nothing  about  the  depreciation  in  market  value  of  the  land. 

"  The  real  remedy  for  the  farmer  is  to  cheapen  the  rate  of 
interest  on  his  mortgage,  and  to  increase  the  demand  for  his 
farm  products. 

"  The  only  way  to  do  this  is  to  increase  the  supply  of  per- 
sonal property  in  his  locality. 

"  Encouragement  to  owners  of  personal  property  to  locate 
their  country  seats  or  business  in  New  York  State  would 
result  in  increased  population,  with  consequent  demand  for 
farm  products,  and  cheaper  railroad  rates  and  better  transit 
facilities,  until  the  market  value  of  land  in  farming  parts  of  the 
State  would  bring  prices  in  proportion  to  the  attractions  of 
nature. 

"  In  New  York  the  real  battle  is  to  convince  the  farmer  that 
the  removal  of  taxation  from  personal  property  is  the  first 
step  in  the  direction  of  his  own  pecuniary  improvement." 


THE   COLLAR-BUTTON  SYSTEM.  63 

It  may  be  worth  while  to  note  the  case  of  a  resident 
of  Ohio,1  who  suffered  from  the  unjust  listing  system 
existing  in  that  State.  After  a  manly  struggle  in  the 
courts  for  the  possession  of  his  personal  property,  he 
removed  from  Ohio.  In  a  letter  to  the  Reno  (Nev.) 
Gazette  of  August  4,  1890,  he  discusses  the  exemption  of 
personal  property  from  taxation.  Here  is  his  letter: 

"The  only  source  of  facts  and  figures  on  the  subject  at  the 
beginning  of  this  communication — issued  under  United  States 
authority,  too — is  the  census.  That  shows  :  First,  that  the 
value  of  real  estate  is  nearly  four  times  that  of  personal  prop- 
erty ;  second,  therefore  real  estate  should  bear  four-fifths  of 
all  taxation,  and  personal  property  one-fifth,  State  and  Fed- 
eral ;  third,  the  same  sources  of  information  show  that  the 
total  of  State  and  Federal  taxes  is  nearly  $723,250,721 — real 
property  $234,563,041,  and  personal  property  $488,687,680. 

"  If  taxes  should  be  levied  according  to  the  values  of  prop- 
erty, then  personal  property  should  pay  one-fifth  of  the  total 
State  and  Federal  taxes,  or  $166,247,666,  and  real  estate  four- 
fifths,  or  $556,903,055  ;  making  the  total  State  and  Federal 
taxes  $723,250,721,  thus  proving  that  personal  property  now 
pays  three  times  as  much  as  it  should,  viz.,  $488,687,680,  as 
shown  by  the  United  States  census.  No  Federal  tax  is  levied 
on  real  estate.  Is  this  right  or  wise  ? 

"  Is  there  any  sense  in  the  demagogue's  cry  for  greater  tax- 
ation of  personal  property  ? 

"  The  supplemental  report  of  Professor  R.  T.  Ely  of  Johns 
Hopkins  University,  Baltimore,  Md.,  to  the  General  Assembly 
of  Maryland,  under  the  heading  of  *  Origin  of  our  System  of 
Taxation,'  says:  'This  system  of  taxation  originated  at  a 

1  The  Hon.  Stephen  B.  Sturges,  now  of  Brooklyn. 


64  WHO   PAYS  YOUR   TAXES? 

very  early  date,  and  has  at  one  time  or  another  been  in  vogue 
in  nearly  every  civilized  nation.  It  has,  however,  been  aban- 
doned in  all  countries  except  the  United  States.  ...  It 
is  characteristic  of  this  system,  that  the  more  you  perfect  it  the 
worse  you  make  it.' 

"  Eastern  States — New  York  and  Connecticut  especially— 
are  seeking  to  attract  owners  of  capital  or  personal  property  to 
those  States  by  placing  little  or  no  taxation  on  personal  prop- 
erty. New  York  laws  and  decisions  are  such  that  none  but 
trustees  of  widows  and  orphans  need  pay  personal  property 
taxes. 

"  Professor  Ely  further  says  :  *  From  the  time  of  Turgot 
and  Adam  Smith  to  the  present,  political  economists  have  not 
ceased  to  warn  the  people  to  be  careful  not  to  drive  away  cap- 
ital by  taxing  it.  ...  The  result  [of  taxing  capital  and 
thus  driving  it  away]  will  be  that  the  farmer  will  find  a  poorer 
home  market  for  his  produce,  on  account  of  diminished 
wealth  in  the  State,  while  his  lands  will  fall  in  value.'  The 
same  writer,  referring  to  a  message  of  the  Hon.  Abram  S. 
Hewitt,  ex-mayor  of  New  York,  to  the  Board  of  Aldermen, 
says :  <  It  advocates  exemption  of  personal  property  from  all 
taxation,  in  order  to  build  up  the  business  of  New  York.  It  is 
plainly  stated  therein  that  all  attempts  to  enforce  the  system 
of  personal  property  taxation,  thoroughly,  in  New  York,  have 
been  practically  abandoned.' 

"Shall  States  drive  away  capital  by  excessive,  unequal,  or 
unjust  taxation  ?  Does  Nevada  desire  to  attract  capital  to  her 
borders  and  her  storehouses  of  treasure  ?  Then  let  her  legis- 
lature appoint  a  committee  of  educated,  intelligent  men;  give 
them  time  and  necessary  expenses  to  visit  other  States  and 
examine  their  laws.  Also  to  examine  the  pamphlets  and  mon- 
ographs ;  reports  to  legislatures  of  New  York,  Connecticut, 
and  other  States  ;  and  those  mentioned  in  the  pamphlet  on 
general  property  taxation  by  Professor  Edwin  R.  A.  Seligman, 


THE   COLLAR-BUTTON  SYSTEM.  65 

of  Columbia  College,  New  York  City.  I  close  with  the  result 
in  Connecticut  so  far,  where  now  the  tax  on  personal  property 
is  only  one-fifth  of  one  per  cent,  a  year  :  the  legislative  com- 
mittee have  recommended  no  taxation  of  personal  property. 
Sincerely  desiring  the  prosperity  of  Nevada  is  my  excuse  for 
this  letter.  The  subject  is  too  extensive  to  be  covered  by  this 
brief  statement." 


CHAPTER   V. 

CAUSES  OF   BUSINESS   DEPRESSION. 

Driving  away  wealth. — Real  estate  derives  its  value  from  personalty. — 
Cause  of  panics. — Law  of  fluctuation  of  real  estate  values. — Real 
estate  the  chute  through  which  the  stream  of  taxes  runs. — Good  policy 
for  owners. — Obscure  causes  appear  by  their  effects. — Illustration. — A 
dog  to  drive  away  custom. — The  damage  he  does. — Why  we  keep  him. 
— A  serious  joke  on  proposed  amendments. — A  case  in  Tennessee. — 
William  Penn's  committee  and  later  procedures. 

GEORGE  H.  ANDREWS,  long  Commissioner  of  Taxes  in 
New  York,  in  a  series  of  letters  dealing  with  the  future 
of  New  York  at  a  time  when  business  was  much 
depressed,  discussed  the  subject  of  taxing  personal  prop- 
erty. He  said  in  letter  seven  of  the  series: 

"  It  must  be  conceded  that  the  relations  between  real 
and  personal  property  are  of  the  most  intimate,  and 
should  be  of  the  most  amicable,  character ;  and  that  real 
estate  is  dependent  for  its  prosperity  upon  the  presence 
of  personal  property,  and  not  its  mere  presence,  but  that 
its  conditions  shall  be  such  as  to  make  it  active,  product- 
ive, and  profitable  to  its  owners.  The  present  depression 
in  the  value  of  real  estate  generally  is  not  from  any 
inherent  cause — that  is,  any  cause  originating  in  and 
peculiar  to  itself.  There  is  no  greater  area  of  real  estate 


CAUSES  OF  BUSINESS  DEPRESSION.  fy 

in  New  York  than  when  its  price  was  much  higher,  but 
the  cause  of  the  decline  is  attributable  only  to  the  con- 
dition and  circumstances  of  personal  property.  When 
the  merchant  finds  his  stock  of  goods  declining  in  value 
on  his  hands,  he  must  reduce  expenses,  pay  less  store 
and  house  rent,  and  curtail  the  pay  of  his  assistants,  com- 
pelling them  in  turn  to  seek  lower  rents.  When  a  bank 
reduces  its  business,  the  pay  of  its  officers  and  clerks  also 
suffers  a  reduction,  and  they,  too,  seek  cheaper  rents. 
When  the  mechanic  and  laborer  find  that  their  personal 
property — skill  and  physical  strength — is  in  less  demand, 
and  their  wages  are  reduced,  or  idleness  forced  upon 
them,  they  also  seek  cheaper  rents,  or  cease  to  pay  rent. 
All  these  classes  are  consumers,  and  with  diminished 
means  their  purchases  of  personal  property  are  dimin- 
ished. They  buy  less  of  the  grocer,  the  butcher,  the 
tailor,  the  milliner,  and  the  retailer  of  dry  goods ;  so  that 
the  grocer,  the  butcher,  the  tailor,  the  milliner,  and  the 
retailer  of  dry  goods,  each  finds  his  business,  profits,  and 
power  to  pay  rent  diminished.  And  as  the  rent  received 
is  the  general  basis  of  real  estate  values,  real  estate, 
under  such  influences,  must  of  course  decline. 

"  While  taxes  represented  but  one-fifth  or  one-sixth  of 
the  rent  received  by  the  real  estate  owner,  they  could  be 
endured ;  but  when  out  of  a  greatly  reduced  rent,  un- 
reduced taxes  take  one-third,  or  perhaps  one-half,  then 
the  burden  is  felt  to  be  unendurable,  and  the  real  estate 
owner  finds  that  he  has  been  struck  by  the  calamity 


68  WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

which  first  struck  the  owners  of  personal  property,  and 
through  them  reached  him.  Now,  all  this  proves  not 
antagonism,  but  harmony  and  unity  of  interest.  Had  no 
disaster  befallen  the  owners  of  personal  property,  it  is 
possible  that  the  wildest  dreams  of  the  operators  in  un- 
improved property  might  have  been  realized. 

"  Real  estate  is  the  last  interest  to  feel  the  effects  of 
a  panic  or  revulsion,  and  it  is  also  the  last  to  recover. 
The  reason  is  obvious.  The  blow  falls  first  upon  per- 
sonal property,  and  through  it,  is  distributed  to  real 
estate,  which  does  not  feel  the  full  force  until  the  whole 
structure  of  society  has  adjusted  itself  to  the  new  con- 
ditions imposed  by  the  disasters  suffered  by  the  owners 
of  personal  property.  For  a  time  such  disasters  are  not 
accepted  as  final ;  there  is  hope  of  recuperation  :  but  at 
last  the  fact  is  accepted,  and  then  the  readjustment  of 
expenses  is  resorted  to,  through  which  real  estate  is 
finally  reached.  So,  too,  recovery  affects  real  estate  last, 
as  that  result  must  be  preceded  by  the  recovery  of  a 
degree  of  prosperity  by  the  owners  of  personal  prop- 
erty in  all  its  multiform  shapes,  or  by  an  absolute  accre- 
tion of  population.  The  latter  means  of  recuperation  is 
the  more  rapid  if  it  can  be  secured,  and  that  is  a  question 
which  shall  receive  consideration. 

"  It  is  not  the  personal  property  of  the  citizens  only 
which  pays  the  taxes  in  this  city,  but  that  of  the  stranger 
within  our  gates  also  contributes.  No  visitor  can  buy  a 
pint  of  peanuts  or  a  diamond  bracelet,  can  ride  in  a  cab 


CAUSES  OF  BUSINESS  DEPRESSION.  69 

or  visit  a  theatre,  can  stay  a  night  in  a  lodging-house  or 
board  a  week  at  a  hotel,  without  contributing  to  the  taxes 
charged  upon  the  buildings.  Not  a  case  of  goods,  a  bale 
of  cotton,  a  stick  of  timber,  or  a  pig  of  iron  can  pass 
through  the  city  without  also  helping  to  bear  the  burden 
of  taxation. 

"  The  great  object,  then,  of  every  real  estate  owner 
should  be  to  bring  more  people  here  with  their  personal 
property  to  occupy  dwellings  and  stores  ;  more  visitors 
to  buy  peanuts  and  diamonds  ;  more  bales  of  cotton  and 
pigs  of  iron  to  be  handled  and  stored — and  so  to  dis- 
tribute the  indirect  taxes  upon  them  as  to  make  the  bur- 
den of  all  taxation  comparatively  easy  to  bear. 

"  In  business  two  policies  are  recognized  :  one  is  to  do 
a  small  trade  with  large  profits,  and  the  other  is  to  do  a 
large  trade  with  small  profits.  The  former  policy  is  one 
of  the  past,  which  has  been  practically  abandoned  as 
narrow,  illiberal,  and  ineffective.  It  is  a  policy  which 
should  not  be  adopted,  and  cannot  be  carried  out  in  the 
face  of  competition  or  opposition  in  trade.  In  such  a 
case  the  competitor  dictates  the  policy.  This  is,  in  some 
sense,  the  problem  which  presents  itself  for  solution  to 
the  people  of  this  city,  as  to  which  policy  they  shall 
adopt.  In  my  judgment,  they  have  no  choice.  In  the 
keen  competition  for  trade,  and  supremacy  in  trade,  the 
rival  dictates  the  policy  to  a  certain  extent,  and  nothing 
but  stolidity  and  obstinacy  can  justify  adherence  to  a 
narrow  and  obstructive  theory.  It  is  the  interest  of  the 


70  WHO  PAYS    YOUR    TAXES? 

real  estate  owner,  which  is  not  only  in  jeopardy,  but  in 
actual  suffering.  It  is  for  his  benefit  these  letters  are 
written,  for  his  welfare  alone  is  bound  up  indissolubly 
with  the  future  of  New  York.  Personal  property  is 
migratory  and  fugitive.  A  truck  or  a  carpet-bag  will 
suffice  to  remove  it,  and  a  draft  or  a  bill  of  exchange  will 
give  it  wings. 

"  The  questions  of  the  hour,  then,  are  substantially 
these  :  how  to  keep,  how  to  attract,  and  how  to  utilize 
this  life-giving,  tax-paying,  debt-bearing  element,  known 
as  personal  property. 

"  Said  Mr.  Burke,  in  his  great  speech  on  the  '  True 
Theory  of  the  Rights  of  Man ' :  'In  states  there  are 
often  some  obscure  and  almost  latent  causes,  things 
which  appear  at  first  of  little  moment,  on  which  a  very 
great  part  of  its  prosperity  or  adversity  may  most  essen- 
tially depend.'  The  insidious,  but  often  fatal,  effects  of 
noxious  gases  from  defective  drains  are  pretty  generally 
understood ;  yet  it  is  often  of  little  use  to  admonish  the 
man  in  vigorous  health  of  danger  from  a  cause  so  remote 
and  obscure.  But  let  the  poison  enter  the  blood  of  his 
family  or  himself,  and  he  will  give  heed  to  statements 
designed  to  remove  the  cause.  To-day  New  York  is 
sick,  and  may  possibly  hearken  to  suggestions  which  in 
other  conditions  would  be  scouted. 

"  What  New  York  needs  for  recovery  from  the  present 
paralysis  in  real  estate,  for  the  development  of  her  re- 
sources, and  to  assure  her  predominance  in  the  future,  is 


CAUSES  OF  BUSINESS  DEPRESSION.  >j\ 

population  and  personal  property ;  or,  to  put  it  more 
concisely,  men  and  money.  Very  well,  you  say,  let  them 
come.  But  just  there  is  the  difficulty — you  won't  let 
them  come.  Let  me  illustrate  by  a  very  few  facts  bear- 
ing upon  the  proposition  '  to  let  them  come.' 

"  An  inquiry  was  made  a  few  months  ago  by  a  mem- 
ber of  the  bar  as  to  whether  a  client  of  his,  not  residing 
here,  by  removing  to  this  city  and  investing  $250,000 
in  business,  would  subject  that  capital  to  taxation.  He 
said  that  his  client  preferred  New  York  as  the  future 
scene  of  his  business  activity,  but  that  this  city  did  not 
present  such  supreme  advantages  over  another  city  as  to 
justify  him  in  paying  the  tax.  With  great  reluctance  his 
counsel  was  told  that  the  law  would  impose  the  tax,  and 
he  went  away  sorrowful. 

"  A  gentleman  from  abroad  recently  brought  letters 
to  a  merchant,  asking  his  cooperation  in  assisting  the 
foreigner  in  obtaining  property  for  establishing  a  manu- 
facturing business  here  with  foreign  capital.  The  mer- 
chant, in  view  of  the  quantity  of  manufacturing  property 
standing  idle,  advised  the  foreigner  to  advertise  for  such 
property.  He  did  so,  and  was  alarmed  at  the  great 
number  of  answers  received,  and  proceeded  to  consult 
the  merchant,  who  was,  in  turn,  amazed.  The  foreigner 
very  wisely  said,  *  If  I  had  received  a  dozen  answers  I 
should  probably  have  proceeded  to  make  my  selection, 
but  there  must  be  some  special  cause  that  has  vacated 
so  much  manufacturing  property.'  The  merchant  ad- 


72  WHO  PAYS   YOUR   TAXES? 

vised  him  to  inquire  of  some  of  the  owners.  He  did  so, 
and  then  first  learned  that  the  taxation  of  capital  was 
literally  the  moving  cause,  and  that  he  too  would  be  sub- 
jected to  it  if  he  invested  here.  And  he,  also,  sought 
another  city. 

"  A  gentleman  who  had  made  a  fortune  of  several  mil- 
lions in  a  distant  State,  charmed  with  the  brightness  and 
gayety  of  the  city,  decided  to  spend  several  months  in 
each  year  here,  and  entered  into  negotiations  for  a  house 
at  an  annual  rent  of  $10,000.  Before  they  were  con- 
cluded he  learned  that  he  might  be  subjected  to  a  tax 
upon  his  personal  property,  and  the  charm  was  broken, 
and  the  man  and  the  money  were  lost  to  the  city. 

"Here  are  three  typical  instances.  There  have  been 
thousands  of  such  within  the  past  ten  years — some  more, 
many  less  important.  *  Let  them  come,'  indeed  !  You 
keep  at  large  expense  a  dog  to  drive  them,  men  and 
money,  off.  He  is,  to  be  sure,  old  and  nearly  toothless ; 
but  they  don't  know  that,  and  he  has  here  and  there 
a  tooth  that  might  puncture  them.  Many  have  been 
bitten,  but  let  us  hope  that  it  may  soon  be  said  : 

'  The  man  recovered  of  the  bite, 
The  dog  it  was  that  died.' 

Is  any  other  business  conducted  upon  a  principle  which 
the  above  examples  illustrate  ?  Does  any  dealer,  whole- 
sale or  retail,  tax  a  visitor  for  entering  his  premises  ? 
While  they  are  on  his  premises  he  protects  them,  shelters 


CAUSES  OF  BUSINESS  DEPRESSION.  73 

them  by  his  roof,  warms  them  by  his  fire,  gives  them 
water  if  thirsty,  would  be  liable  for  damage  if  they  fell 
through  an  unguarded  hatch  or  stairway.  But,  whether 
they  buy  or  not,  he  does  not  present  a  tax  bill  for  the 
'  protection  '  he  has  given.  No,  he  puts  all  that  in  his 
bill  for  goods  sold,  just  as  the  tenant  finds  it  in  his  rent. 
The  difference  between  the  dealer  and  the  city  is  this: 
many  may  visit  the  store  or  shop  and  few  buy,  but  none 
can  live  in  the  city  without  in  some  way  paying  for  such 
*  protection '  as  he  may  receive.  The  customer,  like 
the  untaxed  personal  property,  really  pays  for  all  the 
protection  received,  but  in  such  a  way  as  is  not  felt,  per- 
haps not  even  known. 

"  It  cannot  be  necessary  to  follow  out  in  detail  all  that 
the  city  lost,  when,  as  in  the  cases  cited,  men  and  money 
were  turned  from  the  very  doors  they  desired  to  enter. 
Every  interest  would  have  been  benefited  and  stimulated 
by  their  establishment  here ;  but  real  estate  more  than  all. 
These  rejected,  repelled  elements  are  those  for  the  want 
of  which  real  estate  is  languishing,  rents  declining,  mort- 
gages foreclosing,  ruin  impending.  These  rejected  cus- 
tomers and  consumers  were  willing  to  bear  their  share  of 
taxation,  assessed  as  upon  real  estate,  to  help  to  pay  the 
debt,  and  to  help  to  pay  for  the  government  or  mis- 
government  of  the  city ;  but  they  were  not  willing  to 
incur  the  risk  of  being  specifically  taxed,  in  addition, 
upon  their  personal  property,  not  acquired  here,  perhaps 
not  even  situated  here,  and  which  would  contribute  so 


74  WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

largely  to  the  present  welfare  and  future  prosperity  of 
the  city. 

"  The  law  providing  for  the  assessment  of  personal 
property  is  a  tub  which  has  lost  its  bottom.  The 
remnants  of  it  are  held  together  by  the  cohesion  of 
habit,  custom,  or  usage.  It  will  not  stand  a  jar-  -not  even 
the  jar  you,  gentlemen,  are  giving  it  to-day.  It  cannot 
endure  scrutiny  ;  investigation  is  fatal  to  it.  An  omnibus 
horse  in  this  city  was  lately  doing  his  regular  work  in 
harness,  but  when  taken  out  had  to  be  supported  by 
three  men  in  order  to  reach  his  stable.  You,  to-day, 
have  taken  a  sorry  steed  out  of  his  harness  to  look  at 
his  points,  and  there  are  not  men  enough  in  the  State  to 
get  that  steed  into  the  harness  again  to  do  the  work 
he  did  before.  Every  debate,  every  report,  every  news- 
paper article  enlightens  the  public  as  to  its  rights,  and 
impairs  the  vital  force  of  a  law  already  almost  defunct. 
It  is  fairly  on  its  way  toward  the  morgue,  where  no 
friends  will  ever  claim  its  remains. 

"  This  law  for  taxing  personal  property  has  been 
illustrated  by  the  figure  of  an  almost  toothless  old  cur. 
This  cur  barks  and  scares,  has  an  evil  odor,  and  here  and 
there  a  fang,  which  rends  unmercifully  when  it  does 
penetrate.  What  shall  we  do  with  him  ?  Send  him  to  a 
dentist  for  other  and  sharper  fangs,  or  provide  him  with 
a  short  rope  and  heavy  stone?" 

Letter  IX.  of  this  series  relates,  among  other  things, 
that  — 


CAUSES  OF  BUSINESS  DEPRESSION.  75 

"  An  inquiry  was  made  at  a  casual  meeting  of  several 
gentlemen  interested  in  the  prosperity  of  the  city,  as  to 
what  were  the  hindrances  to  the  enactment  and  enforce- 
ment of  an  equitable  law  which  would  reach  every 
description  of  personal  property,  and  so  distribute  the 
burden  as  to  make  it  light  for  all.  The  answer  was,  that 
to  do  this  only  four  things  were  necessary : 

"  First,  To  amend  the  constitutions  of  the  States. 

"  Second,  To  amend  the  Constitution  of  the  United 
States. 

"  Third,  To  amend  the  constitution  of  human  nature. 

"  Fourth,  To  amend  the  constitution  of  things. 

"  The  Constitution  of  the  United  States  would  have  to 
be  amended,  for  under  it  full  one-third  of  the  personal 
property  in  this  city  is  placed  beyond  the  reach  of  State 
tax  laws. 

"  The  constitutions  of  other  States  would  have  to  be 
amended,  so  that  their  laws  shall  conform  to  yours ;  for 
you  might  as  well  burn  down  certain  business  portions  of 
the  city  as  to  attempt  to  enforce  such  a  law  in  the  face 
of  competing  rivals  with  more  liberal  tax  laws. 

"  The  constitution  of  human  nature  and  of  things  would 
have  to  be  amended,  or  persons  and  personal  property 
would  hide  or  die,  or  fly  to  other  countries  beyond  the 
reach  of  your  amendments,  impelled  by  the  instinct  of 
self-preservation." 

Some  suggestions  are  made  by  Enoch  Ensley  of  Mem- 
phis, Tenn.,  in  an  open  letter  to  Governor  Brown.  The 


76  WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

letter  was  published  in  1873,  under  the  title,  "The  Tax 
Question.  What  should  be  Taxed,  and  How  it  should 
be  Taxed.  Suggestions  for  the  People  of  Tennessee  to 
consider." 

"  I  hold,"  says  Mr.  Ensley,  "  that,  of  all  men,  the  real  estate 
or  fixed  property  owner  is  most  interested  in  the  rule  or  motto 
I  have  adopted.  To  illustrate,  I  will  say  there  is  an  acre  of 
ground  in  Memphis — say  in  front  of  the  Overton  Block — that 
is  worth  $200,000  ;  while  the  writer  has  an  acre  six  miles 
below  the  city,  quite  as  good  naturally,  and  even  better 
(because  it  will  produce  more  corn,  cotton,  pumpkins,  peas, 
potatoes,  cabbages,  etc.,  than  the  Overton  lot  will,  or  ever 
would),  and  my  acre  is  not  worth  $100  an  acre.  Now,  why 
is  it  that  the  Overton  acre  is  worth  $200,000,  and  mine  is 
not  worth  $100  ?  The  reason  is  that  there  is  employed  on  the 
Overton  acre,  profitably,  several  hundred  thousand  dollars  of 
movable  property,  whilst  upon  mine  there  is  employed  the  six- 
teenth part  of  a  negro,  the  sixteenth  part  of  a  mule,  plow, 
hoe,  etc.  Now,  if  you  will  manage  in  any  way,  either  by  tax- 
ation or  otherwise,  to  drive  from  this  Overton  acre  the  two, 
three,  or  five  hundred  thousand  dollars,  and  render  it  so  that 
this  capital  cannot  be  employed  upon  it  with  a  profit,  it  will  not 
be  worth  more  than  my  acre — in  fact,  not  so  much,  for  there  is 
nothing  so  valueless  as  ground  covered  with  houses,  when  there 
is  no  demand  for  said  houses.  And  further,  if  you  do  any- 
thing to  make  the  two,  three,  or  five  hundred  thousand  dollars 
pay  less  profit,  you  will  damage  the  ground  or  lessen  its  value, 
more  rapidly  than  you  will  decrease  the  profits— not  in  the  same 
ratio,  but  more  rapidly.  Suppose,  for  instance,  the  profit  has 
been  ten  per  cent,  net  on  the  capital  employed,  and  the  prop- 
erty is  paying  a  rental  on  $300,000  :  if  you  reduce  the  profits 
permanently,  in  any  way,  to  five  per  cent,  net,  the  property 
would  not  pay  a  rental  on  $150,000  ;  in  fact,  it  would  hardly 


CAUSES  OF  BUSINESS  DEPRESSION.  ^ 

pay  any  rent   at  all,  for  five  per  cent,  would  be  too  small  to 
induce  a  business  at  all  in  this  country.     .     .     . 

"  Exemption  of  personalty  will  lighten  the  burdens  of  tax- 
ation on  real  estate,  and  after  a  short  time  the  rate  of  taxation 
will  be  really  less.  A  short  time  ago  a  real  estate  owner  of 
Memphis  said  to  me  :  *  Do  you  say  that  a  merchant  or  banker 
shall  make  from  ten  to  sixteen  per  cent,  on  his  capital,  and 
pay  no  tax,  and  I  make  only  six  or  eight  per  cent,  on  the 
houses  the  merchant  and  the  banker  are  occupying,  and  pay  all 
the  tax  ?  '  Yes,'  said  I  ;  'you  seek  to  tax  them,  and  that  is  the 
reason  you  get  no  larger  per  cent,  on  your  property.  I  say,  if 
they  make  one  hundred  per  cent,  per  annum  on  their  capital, 
you  should  not  want  them  to  pay  a  copper  of  tax.  Why  ? 
Because  if  they  made  it  you  would  have  forty  applicants  for 
the  house  they  are  doing  business  in  ;  and  if  you  should,  you 
would  certainly  get  a  full  rent  for  it,  more  than  the  extra  tax, 
as  only  one  of  the  forty  could  get  it,  and  the  other  thirty- 
nine  would  be  unaccommodated.  And  if  your  tenants  should 
be  making  this  large  per  cent,  it  is  reasonable  to  presume  that 
men  would  be  making  something  near  it  all  over  town.  But 
as  only  the  present  tenants,  or  their  number,  could  be  accom- 
modated with  houses,  the  result  would  be  that  you  would  not 
only  get  exorbitant  rents  for  all  the  houses  in  town,  but  you 
would  have  demand  for  the  hundreds  of  thousands  of  vacant 
lots  throughout  the  city,  to  build  storehouses  on  ;  they  would 
buy  them,  or  offer  you  such  enormous  rents  as  would  induce 
you  to  build  them  houses  on  lots  that  you  have  been  paying 
taxes  on  for  years,  and  received  no  rental  from.  Soon  there 
would  be  houses  going  up  all  over  the  city,  block  after  block. 
The  brickmaker,  the  lumberman,  the  carpenter,  the  bricklayer, 
and  all  descriptions  of  mechanics  and  laborers  would  have 
more  than  they  could  do,  so  that  the  builders  would  have  to 
send  elsewhere  for  mechanics.  All  these  newcomers  in  turn 
would  want  residences,  and  thus  you  would  bring  into  demand 


78  WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

and  make  pay  rental  thousands  of  lots  that  have  never  paid 
anything,  give  active  employment  to  all  the  mechanics  you 
have,  and  besides  bring  thousands  from  other  places. 

"  Let  us  go  a  little  further  and  see  how  this  policy  affects  all 
and  everybody  in  the  city.  These  newcomers  get  their  houses, 
and  then  they  want  furniture,  and  they  patronize  the  furniture 
man  ;  they  want  a  carriage  or  wagon  for  family  use,  and  they 
patronize  your  carriage  man  ;  and  then  horses,  and  patronize 
the  horse  man,  and  then  the  blacksmith  to  shoe  them  ;  and 
then  the  retail  dry-goods  houses,  mantua-makers,  milliners, 
grocerymen,  butchers —  and,  in  short.,  every  kind  of  retail 
establishment  throughout  the  city,  thereby  giving  vigor,  life, 
and  thrift  to  all.  And  thus  it  would  go  on,  until,  before  you 
are  aware  of  it,  you  would  have  a  city  of  thousands  of  people, 
and  be  worth  and  pay  a  rental  on  hundreds  of  millions  of  dol- 
lars. Then  where  would  be  your  city  and  county  debt,  and  a 
necessity  for  a  high  rate  of  taxation  ?  and  where  would  be  the 
oppression,  when  you  have  got  four  times  as  much  to  pay 
with  ?  " 

In  a  report  of  the  law  committee  of  the  Common 
Council  of  Philadelphia,  submitted  February  16,  1871,  we 
find  a  valuable  historical  review  of  the  tax  laws  of  Phila- 
delphia, under  the  government  of  William  Penn  and  his 
successors  in  the  colonial  government. 

"These  laws  were  framed  to  avoid  repeating  errors  which 
had  been  proven  by  long  experience  in  Great  Britain  and  the 
Continental  countries.  Anxious  to  foster  trade,  commerce,  and 
industry,  and  make  the  province  the  home  of  a  free  people,  the 
founder  of  Pennsylvania  came  with  a  plan  of  government. 
The  earliest  enactments  of  direct  tax  laws  show  that  he  and 
those  who  followed  him  were  as  careful,  in  this  regard,  in 
profiting  by  the  most  enlightened  views  of  his  time,  as  they 


CAUSES  OF  BUSINESS  DEPRESSION. 


79 


were  in  planning  the  city  with  broad  and  regular  streets  for  *  a 
great  town.'  Before  this  period,  although  personal  estate  had 
not  attained  the  magnitude  and  importance  in  Great  Britain 
that  it  has  at  this  time,  yet  tax  laws  had  been  enacted  to  rate 
it  and  make  it  pay  part  of  the  public  burdens.  These  laws 
were  found  to  be  inquisitorial  in  their  nature,  and,  by  conceal- 
ment, evasion,  and  perjury,  were  not  only  demoralizing  to  the 
people,  but  the  enlarged  basis  was  found  to  be  more  unequal 
than  the  retention  of  a  few  subjects  for  the  levy.  Added  to 
this,  the  higher  rate  of  interest  paid  in  France  and  other  Con- 
tinental countries  drew  from  the  kingdom  capital  which  should 
have  been  retained  to  improve  their  own  country  and  give  em- 
ployment to  the  people.  The  English  government,  therefore, 
wisely  abandoned  this  system,  and  it  was  in  the  light  of  these 
facts  that  our  first  enactments  were  made.  We  find  the  Pro- 
vincial Council  (1683)  first  determining  that  'a  publick  tax  on 
land  ought  to  be  raised  to  defray  the  publick  charge';  and  the 
enactment  of  1700,  fixing  county  rates  and  levies  (which  law 
was  not  enrolled),  is  believed  to  have  been  not  larger  in  the 
subjects  of  county  rates  than  in  the  act  of  1724,  which  were  real 
estate,  horses,  cattle,  sheep,  negroes,  and  a  poll-tax.  It  will  be 
noticed  that  the  personal  estate  here  enumerated  was  visible 
property  not  susceptible  of  concealment,  and  that  debts,  ac- 
counts, merchandise,  and  ships  are  nowhere  mentioned.  In 
the  several  enactments  that  followed  in  1795,  1799,  and  1834, 
the  subjects  of  county  levy  were  substantially  the  same — sheep 
and  slaves  being  omitted  in  the  last  act,  and  officers  added  to 
the  last  two — and  it  was  not  until  1844,  a  period  when  the  State, 
by  large  expenditures,  had  become  embarrassed,  that,  by  the 
act  of  the  29th  day  of  April,  1844,  mortgages,  money  owing 
by  solvent  debtors,  stocks,  household  furniture,  public  loans, 
watches,  etc.,  were  made  taxable  for  county  purposes.  The 
attempted  enforcement  of  this  act  was  so  injurious  to  the 
people,  by  driving  capital  and  industrial  establishments  from 


go  WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

the  State,  and  so  evaded  in  returns,  that  by  common  consent 
the  law  remained  on  the  statute  book  a  dead  letter  until  the 
consolidation  of  the  city. 

"At  that  time  (1854)  the  question  was  again  discussed,  and 
although  the  councils  of  the  city  had  the  power  to  impose  the 
tax  rate  upon  all  the  subjects  of  taxation,  in  the  thirty-second 
section  of  the  act  of  1844  we  find,  by  the  first  ordinances,  they 
limited  the  levy  to  real  estate,  furniture,  horses,  cattle,  and 
pleasure  carriages,  and  so  continued  until  1864,  when  an  act 
was  passed  empowering  the  city  to  levy  taxes  on  all  the  sub- 
jects of  taxation  contained  in  that  section  of  the  act  of  1844 — 
a  power  which  they  possessed  before,  but  had  not  exercised. 

"  Since  that  time  the  authority  of  the  city  to  levy  a  tax  on 
mortgages,  stocks  of  Pennsylvania  corporations,  and  occupa- 
tions, has  been  repealed.  In  considering  the  enlargement  of 
the  subjects  of  levy  in  this  city,  the  fact  must  not  be  lost  sight 
of,  that  the  State  does  not  impose  any  tax  on  real  estate  for 
State  purposes,  but  derives  all  its  revenue  from  corporation 
stocks  and  loans,  mercantile  license,  tavern  licenses,  collateral 
inheritance,  etc.;  and  it  is  estimated  that  of  the  gross  receipts 
for  1870  ($6,336,603),  more  than  two-fifths  of  the  amount 
($2,600,000)  was  derived  from  the  property  and  business 
interests  of  the  citizens  of  this  city." 


CHAPTER   VI. 

AN   IMMORAL   FARCE. 

General  and  local  taxation  in  this  country. — Personal  property  taxation  in 
the  State  of  New  York. — Some  curious  forms  of  taxation. — Maryland's 
tax  on  bachelors. — Self-assessment. — The  guessing  system. — Classes 
upon  whom  the  listing  system  is  a  burden. — Who  pay  personal  taxes  — 
Tax  dodging. — Some  interesting  percentages. — Inequalities  and  incon- 
gruities of  the  New  York  system  as  shown  by  a  former  tax  commissioner 
in  New  York  City. — Failure  of  personal  taxation  in  Connecticut. — 
Instances  of  double  taxation. — The  remedy  :  abolition  of  taxation  upon 
personal  property. 

MR.  JULIEN  T.  DAVIES  presents  an  admirable  argument 
in  favor  of  abolishing  the  tax  assessed  upon  personal 
property  according  to  the  laws  of  New  York.  The  objec- 
tions that  Mr.  Davies  found  to  the  law  as  administered 
in  this  State  are  of  wide  application,  and  accordingly  his 
address  is  embodied  in  this  chapter.  He  shows  that  the 
personal  property  tax  as  administered  in  the  State  of 
New  York  is  oppressive  in  its  incidence,  immoral  in  its 
tendency,  and  grotesque  in  many  of  its  peculiarities.  He 
says : 

"  In  examining  the  various  methods  that  are  employed 
in  different  parts  of  the  world  to  extract  from  the  people 
the  necessary  contributions  for  the  support  of  govern- 


82  WHO    PAYS    YOUR    TAXES? 

ment,  it  is  noticeable  that  while  in  England  and  on  the 
Continent,  and  indeed  in  most  civilized  countries,  a  land 
tax,  or  a  tax  upon  land  values,  and  an  income  tax  arc- 
principally  depended  upon,  in  this  country,  apart  from 
the  indirect  taxation  of  commodities  by  the  United 
States  Government,  the  States,  for  both  general  and 
local  purposes,  depend  almost  entirely  upon  direct  tax 
ation  of  land  and  personal  property.  Franchise  taxes 
on  corporations,  inheritance  taxes,  taxes  upon  the  organ- 
ization of  corporations,  and  some  other  methods  of  rais- 
ing money  of  minor  importance,  have  been  employed  of 
late  years  in  some  of  the  States.  The  main  depend- 
ence, however,  in  nearly  all  the  States  of  the  Union,  for 
raising  money  for  State,  county,  and  municipal  purposes, 
is  a  general  tax  levied  upon  land  and  upon  the  mass  of 
the  tax-payers'  personal  property.  It  is  proposed  to 
consider  at  the  present  time  only  the  subject  of  direct 
taxation  of  personal  property. 

"  The  sweeping  character  of  the  enactments  of  the 
several  States  on  this  subject  can  be  best  appreciated  by 
a  reference  to  the  provisions  of  the  laws  of  our  own 
State  defining  personal  property  liable  to  taxation.  The 
statute,  after  enacting  that  'all  personal  estate  within 
the  State,  whether  owned  by  individuals  or  by  corpora 
tions,  shall  be  liable  to  taxation,'  subject  to  the  speci- 
fied exemptions,  provides  as  follows: 

"  '  Section  3.     The  term  "  personal  estate  and  personal 
property,"   whenever  they    occur   in  this   chapter,  shall 


AN  IMMORAL  FARCE.  83 

be  construed  to  include  all  household  furniture,  money, 
goods,  chattels,  debts  due  from  solvent  debtors,  whether 
on  account,  contract,  note,  bond  or  mortgage,  public  stock, 
and  stocks  in  moneyed  corporations ;  they  shall  also  be 
construed  to  include  such  portion  of  the  capital  of  incor- 
porated companies  liable  to  taxation  on  their  capital  as 
shall  not  be  invested  in  real  estate.'  (2  R.  S.,  ;th  ed., 
982,  Part  I.,  Chap.  13,  Title  I.) 

"This  definition  of  personal  estate  or  personal  prop- 
erty is  intended  to  embrace  everything  that  can  be  con- 
ceived of  as  included  in  these  general  terms,  and  it  is 
reasonably  successful  in  its  purpose. 

"  The  statute  is  somewhat  confusing  in  its  reference 
to  the  stocks  and  capital  of  corporations.  The  practical 
effect  of  its  provisions,  taken  with  others  bearing  upon 
the  same  subject,  is  that  substantially  all  corporations  of 
this  State,  except  banks,  life  insurance  companies,  and 
savings  banks,  are  liable  to  taxation  upon  all  their  per- 
sonal property,  except  stocks  in  other  corporations  ;  and 
the  stockholders  of  these  taxable  corporations  are  not 
obliged  to  include  in  their  estimate  of  personal  property 
subject  to  taxation  the  stocks  of  the  companies  that  are 
liable  directly  to  taxation  on  their  personal  property. 
Banks  alone,  both  State  and  National,  are  not  directly 
taxed  on  capital  and  personal  property,  but  their  stock- 
holders are  taxed  on  their  stock.  This  system  is  peculiar 
to  banks,  and  rendered  necessary  by  the  provisions  of  the 
National  Banking  Act. 


84  WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

"  The  practice  of  taxing  all  personal  property  of  the 
citizen  is  of  comparatively  recent  origin  in  the  United 
States,  and  for  the  best  of  reasons.  Personal  property, 
especially  that  of  an  intangible  character,  consisting  of 
credits,  notes,  bonds,  and  evidences  of  debt,  is  itself  of 
recent  origin.  Our  forefathers,  one  hundred  and  fifty 
years  ago,  possessed  as  personal  property  a  little  house- 
hold furniture,  some  linen,  a  few  oxen,  horses  and  cattle, 
without  doubt  a  gun  or  two,  with  a  reasonable  store  of 
ammunition  ;  but  beyond  these  articles  of  visible,  tan- 
gible property  they  were  not  troubled  with  personal 
estate.  Railroad  shares,  promissory  notes,  bonds  and 
mortgages,  certificates  of  deposit,  and  all  the  multifarious 
forms  of  credits  and  evidences  of  debt  by  which  we  are 
enabled  to-day  to  secure  interests  in  land  or  in  visible, 
tangible  personal  property  in  the  possession  of  others, 
were  absolutely  unknown  to  them. 

"  There  are  some  very  curious  instances  of  the  methods 
that  were  adopted  in  the  States  in  early  times  to  raise 
money.  For  instance,  in  Maryland  a  tax  was  imposed  on 
all  bachelors  above  twenty-five  years  of  age.  This  was 
levied  according  to  their  property,  one  hundred  per  cent, 
being  added  in  case  of  papists.  In  New  York,  where  pos- 
sibly there  were  fewer  bachelors  above  twenty-five  years 
of  age,  a  tax  on  wigs  took  the  place  of  the  Maryland  tax. 
A  more  serious  explanation  of  the  tax  on  wigs  can  be 
found  in  the  circumstance  that  wigs  were  luxuries  enjoyed 
only  by  the  well-to-do  men  of  the  community. 


AN  IMMORAL   FARCE.  85 

"  When  all  personal  property  was  of  a  visible  and  tangi- 
ble character,  there  was  no  opportunity  to  conceal  its 
ownership  and  to  avoid  the  tax.  A  tax  on  personal  prop- 
erty was  then  assessed  and  collected  with  comparative 
ease  and  fairness.  Each  member  of  the  community  then 
took  a  sufficient  interest  in  his  neighbor's  affairs  to  see 
that  justice  was  done  in  this  regard.  This  kind  of  friendly 
interest  found  expression  in  Rhode  Island  in  a  law  that 
was  passed  in  1673,  by  which  it  was  provided  that,  under 
certain  circumstances,  a  citizen  might  be  required  *  to  give 
in  writing  what  proportion  of  estate  and  strength  in  par- 
ticular, he  guesseth  ten  of  his  neighbors,  nameing  them 
in  particular,  hath  in  estate  and  strength  to  his  estate 
and  strength.' 

"It   is    only  fair  to   add,  however,  that  this  law  was 
intended  to  prevent  tax-dodging,  and  only  required  a  man 
to  guess  with  respect  to  the  relative  size  of  his  neighbors' 
estates  to  his  own,  when  he   himself  was  suspected   of 
having  undervalued  his  own  estate. 

"  Two  methods  have  been  employed  in  the  United 
States  for  the  purpose  of  ascertaining  the  amount  of  tax- 
able personal  property  owned  by  individual  citizens. 

"  First,  In  several  States,  such  as  Massachusetts,  Con- 
necticut, and  Illinois,  the  tax-payer  is  required  to  give 
each  year  to  the  assessor  a  detailed  and  verified  state- 
ment, carefully  itemized,  of  all  the  personal  property 
owned  by  him  or  under  his  control,  and  of  every  kind, 
sort,  and  description.  This  method  is  generally  known  as 


86  WHO  PA  YS  YOUR  TAXES? 

*  the  listing  system.'  In  several  of  the  States  the  prin- 
ciple that  a  State  can  tax  only  that  which  is  within  its 
territorial  jurisdiction  is  ignored,  and  even  visible,  tangible 
property  situated  outside  of  the  taxing  State  is  required 
to  be  returned  for  the  purpose  of  taxation. 

"  Second,  The  other  and  more  general  method  of  ascer- 
taining taxable  personal  estate  is  that  with  which  we  are 
familiar  in  the  State  of  New  York,  by  which  the  assessor 
guesses  at  the  personal  property  of  the  victim,  and  places 
him  upon  the  list  at  such  a  figure  as  either  his  informa- 
tion or  imagination  sustains  him  in  considering  to  be  that 
which  justly  represents  the  personal  estate  of  the  tax- 
payer. 

"  In  a  case  involving  the  assessment  of  personal  prop- 
erty, in  one  of  the  courts  of  this  State  a  few  years  ago,  an 
assessor  in  one  of  our  cities  testified  that  his  method  of 
ascertaining  what  personal  property  a  tax-payer  owned 
was  to  examine  the  directories,  the  county  clerk's  office, 
and  papers  relative  to  estates  of  deceased  persons  ;  and, 
when  he  lacked  definite  information,  to  guess  at  the 
assessment  from  the  place  of  business  or  of  residence 
occupied  by  the  tax-payer.  If  the  tax  was  cheerfully 
paid  for  two  or  three  years,  the  personal  assessment 
would  then  be  '  marked  up.'  This  process  of  increasing 
the  personal  assessment  went  on  until,  as  the  witness 
graphically  said,  the  tax-payer  '  squealed,'  when  the 
amount  was  finally  fixed  at  what  the  tax-payer  would 
bear  without  swearing  it  off. 


AN  IMMORAL  FARCE.  87 

"  It  is  obvious  that  in  cases  of  special  partnerships, 
trustees,  and  executors  who  may  have  recently  accounted, 
persons  who  have  taken  estates  upon  the  settlement  of 
which  inventories  or  accounts  may  have  been  filed,  and 
indeed  in  all  cases  where  a  record  of  the  transmission  of 
personal  property  has  been  made,  a  vigilant  assessor  is 
reasonably  successful  in  reaching  all  the  personal  prop- 
erty of  the  individual. 

"  It  is  also  true,  that,  in  the  case  of  a  merchant,  a  fair 
guess  can  be  made  with  respect  to  the  value  of  his  stock 
in  trade,  and  some  estimate  can  be  formed  of  the  value 
of  household  furniture  contained  in  a  costly  residence  of 
an  ascertained  value.  Other  visible,  tangible  property, 
such  as  stock,  cattle,  and  horses,  especially  those  in  the 
hands  of  farmers,  the  details  of  whose  affairs  are  well 
known  to  their  neighbors,  can  all  be  estimated  with 
reasonable  certainty.  Beyond  these  matters,  however,  an 
assessor  cannot  penetrate.  He  has  absolutely  no  resource 
except  to  push  up  the  assessment  of  individuals,  until, 
in  the  words  of  the  witness  in  question,  they  '  squeal.' 
When  they  '  squeal,'  the  assessor  may  be  sure  that  they 
are  hurt,  and  that  the  limit  of  actual  ownership  of  tax- 
able personal  property  has  been  reached,  if  not  passed, 
by  his  efforts. 

"  As  might  be  expected,  the  operation  of  this  system  in 
the  State  of  New  York  results  substantially  in  the  col- 
lection of  no  tax  on  personal  property  except  from  three 
classes  of  tax-payers 


gg  WHO  PA  YS  YOUR  TAXES? 

"  (i)  Corporations  who  are  obliged  to  make  sworn  re- 
turns, not  only  to  the  assessors  but  also  to  other  public 
officials. 

"  (2)   Executors,  trustees,  and  special  partnerships. 

"  (3)  Those  who  are  too  conscientious,  too  careless,  or 
too  ignorant,  to  arrange  their  affairs  in  such  a  manner  as 
not  to  be  liable  for  taxation  on  personal  property. 

"  As  the  law  stands  to-day,  no  man  in  the  State  of 
New  York  who  owns  personal  property  in  his  own  right 
need  pay  a  personal  tax  unless  he  chooses  so  to  do.  The 
sovereign  power  of  the  State  of  New  York  cannot  reach 
for  purposes  of  taxation  the  instrumentalities  of  the 
United  States  Government.  It  is  absolutely  essential  to 
the  maintenance  of  the  supremacy  of  the  Federal  Gov- 
ernment within  its  own  sphere,  that  the  taxing  power  of 
the  States  should  not  extend  to  the  obligations  of  the 
General  Government. 

"Chief  Justice  Marshall  said,  'The  power  to  tax  is 
the  power  to  destroy ; '  and  in  the  circumstance  that  a 
State  government  is  forbidden  by  the  spirit  of  the  Con- 
stitution of  the  United  States  to  destroy  the  credit  of  the 
General  Government,  or  the  pecuniary  value  of  its  bonds 
or  other  obligations,  he  found  the  conclusion  that  these 
instrumentalities  were  free  from  taxation  by  any  State. 

"  Another  matter  to  be  borne  in  mind  in  this  connec- 
tion is,  that  the  status  of  an  individual  for  purposes  of 
taxation  upon  personal  property  in  this  State  is  fixed  by 
his  place  of  residence  and  ownership  of  property  upon 


AN  IMMORAL  FARCE.  £9 

a  day  certain,  when  the  assessors  have  completed  their 
preliminary  inquiries,  have  arranged  their  assessment 
rolls,  and  opened  them  for  correction.  Throughout  the 
State  of  New  York  generally,  that  day  is  the  1st  of  July. 
In  the  city  of  New  York  it  is  the  second  Monday  of 
January.1  What  a  man  owns  in  personal  property  in  the 
city  of  New  York  on  the  second  Monday  of  January, 
and  the  manner  in  which  his  investments  are  made  upon 
that  day,  determine  the  question  whether  or  not  he  is 
taxable  for  personal  property. 

"Still  another  element  in  the  combination  is  the  prin- 
ciple, that  in  the  State  of  New  York  the  debts  of  the  tax- 
payer can  be  deducted  from  his  assessment  for  personal 
estate. 

"  By  combining  these  different  facts,  it  follows,  that  if 
A,  in  the  city  of  New  York,  on  the  Saturday  preceding 
the  second  Monday  of  January,  owned  one  hundred 
thousand  dollars  in  taxable  personal  property,  and  de- 
sired to  avoid  being  taxed  on  it,  he  would  on  that  day 
buy  United  States  bonds  to  the  market  value  of  one 
hundred  thousand  dollars  and  give  his  note  in  payment 
therefor.  His  position,  then,  upon  the  second  Monday 
of  January  would  be  : 

"  (i)  That  he  owned  one  hundred  thousand  dollars  of 
taxable  personal  property. 

i  The  different  dates  on  which  assessments  are  made  in  Brooklyn,  Jersey 
City,  and  New  York  City  furnish  an  additional  facility  for  evasion  of  per- 
sonal property,  by  transfers  of  ownership  or  subjective  sales. — ED. 


QO  WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

"  (2)  That  he  owned  one  hundred  thousand  dollars  of 
United  States  bonds. 

"  (3)  That  he  owed  one  hundred  thousand  dollars. 

"  Let  us  suppose  that  the  Tax  Commissioners  of  the 
city  of  New  York  have  guessed  that  A  owned  one  hun- 
dred thousand  dollars  of  taxable  personal  property,  and 
have  placed  him  upon  the  books  of  Annual  Record, 
which  are  opened  for  correction  on  the  second  Monday 
of  January,  as  assessable  in  this  amount  of  one  hundred 
thousand  dollars.  At  any  time  before  the  first  day  of 
May,  A  calmly  presents  himself  at  the  Tax  Commis- 
sioners' office.  He  states  to  the  Tax  Commissioners  the 
fact  that  he  owns  two  hundred  thousand  dollars  of  per- 
sonal estate,  one  hundred  thousand  dollars  being  invested 
in  United  States  bonds  and  one  hundred  thousand  dol- 
lars in  taxable  personal  property.  The  United  States 
bonds  must,  of  course,  be  thrown  out,  and  the  one 
hundred  thousand  dollars  of  taxable  personal  estate  is 
extinguished  and  marked  off  by  the  indebtedness  of  a 
hundred  thousand  dollars,  which  A  naturally  takes  pains 
to  bring  to  the  attention  of  the  Tax  Commissioners.  It 
is  of  no  consequence  whatever  that  A  has  bought  the 
United  States  bonds  and  incurred  his  indebtedness  for 
the  express  purpose  of  being  relieved  from  his  personal 
taxes.  It  is  immaterial,  and  indeed  impertinent,  for  the 
assessing  officer  to  ask  A  what  his  motive  was  in  pur- 
chasing the  bonds  and  running  into  debt  therefor.  A 
has  violated  no  law,  but  has  acted  strictly  in  accordance 


AN  IMMORAL  FARCE.  91 

with  the  law,  in  discreetly  arranging  his  little  affairs  in 
the  manner  that  has  been  described. 

"  Anybody  who  has  the  curiosity  to  examine  the  case 
of  The  People  on  the  relation  of  Thurman  vs.  Ryan,  re- 
ported in  the  88th  of  New  York,  at  page  142,  will  find 
that  I  have  substantially  stated  the  facts  that  appear  in 
that  case.  The  Court  said  : 

"'Nor  do  we  perceive  how,  by  a  purchase  in  the  man- 
ner narrated  in  the  return,  the  buyer  evades  our  law  of 
taxation.  The  law  does  not  prohibit  it, — therefore,  does 
not  apply, — and  in  such  a  case  there  can  be  no  evasion.' 

"  It  is  impracticable  to  correct  this  evil  by  permitting 
United  States  bonds  to  be  taxable  by  the  States,  and 
the  necessity  of  permitting  the  deduction  of  debts  from 
the  assessment  of  personal  property  in  order  to  avoid  the 
injustice  of  double  taxation  is  so  apparent,  that  the  case 
is  really  one  without  any  remedy,  except  that  of  total 
abolition  of  an  attempt  to  reach  the  mass  of  personal 
property  in  the  hands  of  the  tax-payer. 

"  The  practical  effect  of  the  workings  of  our  system  of 
personal  taxation  in  the  State  of  New  York  is  that,  sub- 
stantially, there  is  no  tax  upon  personal  property  except 
upon  the  classes  of  citizens  that  I  have  enumerated  above, 
and  it  is  unjust  that  they  should  be  forced  alone  to  bear 
a  burden  that  should  rest  upon  the  entire  community,  if 
at  all.  I  do  not  speak  of  corporations  so  much  as  with 
respect  to  individuals.  The  tax  upon  corporations  is 
estimated  by  the  value  of  their  capital  stock,  which, 


92  WHO  PAYS   YOUR   TAXES? 

while  frequently  arrived  at  by  valuing  their  personal 
property,  is  not  always  so  considered.  The  element  of  a 
tax  upon  their  franchises  enters  into  the  personal  taxation 
of  corporations  in  this  State  even  for  local  purposes  ;  and 
in  the  main  the  system  is  not  oppressive,  although  there 
are  certain  instances  where,  owing  to  peculiar  circum- 
stances, great  injustice  is  worked.  But  with  respect  to 
the  individuals  who  are  compelled  by  the  operation  of  our 
system  of  taxation  to  pay  a  substantial  personal  tax,  one 
that  bears  any  just  relation  or  any  fair  proportion  to  the 
amount  of  personal  property  owned  by  them,  in  almost 
every  instance  an  injustice  is  perpetrated,  and  an  extra- 
ordinary burden  is  cast  upon  the  individual,  which  is 
almost  entirely  escaped  by  nearly  all  others  who  are  liable 
to  pay. 

"  The  truth  of  these  observations  can  be  seen  at  a 
glance  in  observing  the  relative  percentages  of  the 
assessed  valuations  of  personal  and  real  estate  in  this 
State  during  the  past  few  years.  It  is  impossible  to  form 
any  absolutely  accurate  estimate  of  the  comparative  val- 
ues of  the  real  and  personal  estate  owned  in  any  com- 
munity. It  is  a  very  safe  estimate,  and  doubtless  one  far 
below  the  truth,  to  judge  that  in  a  State  of  such  wealth  as 
New  York,  the  value  of  the  personal  property  at  least 
equals  that  of  the  real  estate.  We  find,  however,  that  in 
the  State  of  New  York,  of  the  entire  State  taxes,  the  per 
cent,  paid  by  real  estate  in  1875  was  82.80  ;  the  per  cent, 
of  the  tax  paid  by  personal  property  in  1875  was  17.20. 


AN  IMMORAL   FARCE.  93 

"The  per  cent,  paid  in  1885  by  real  estate  was  88.53. 
The  per  cent,  paid  by  personal  property  in  1885  was 
11:47. 

"  According  to  the  recent  assessment,  completed  in 
October  last,  with  respect  to  the  State  taxes,  the  State 
tax  of  1891  will  be  paid  to  the  extent  of  about  90  per 
cent,  by  the  real  estate,  and  about  10  per  cent,  by  per- 
sonal property. 

"  A  study  of  assessment  rolls  in  the  city  of  New  York 
furnishes  interesting  information  with  respect  to  the  pro- 
portionate amounts  of  real  and  personal  property  assessed 
in  this  city  during  the  last  twenty  years. 

"  In  1870  the  percentage  of  personal  property  was 
29  per  cent,  and  that  of  real  property  71  per  cent,  of 
the  assessed  valuation  of  both  real  and  personal  property 
in  the  city  of  New  York  for  that  year. 

"  In  1880  the  assessed  valuation  of  personal  property  in 
the  city  of  New  York  was  18  per  cent.,  and  that  of  real 
estate  82  per  cent,  of  the  total  assessed  valuations  of  both 
species  of  property  for  that  year. 

"  The  lowest  point  was  reached  in  1885,  when  the 
assessed  valuation  of  personal  property  in  the  city  of 
New  York  was  15  per  cent.,  and  that  of  real  estate  85  per 
cent,  of  the  total  assessed  valuations  for  that  year. 

"  Since  1885  personal  property  in  the  city  of  New  York 
has  been  more  closely  followed  up  for  purposes  of  assess- 
ment, with  the  result  that  for  the  year  1890  the  per- 
centage of  personal  property  assessed  was  18  per  cent., 


94  WHO  PAYS   YOUR  TAXES? 

and  of  real  estate  82  per  cent,  of  the  total  assessed  valua- 
tions of  both  real  and  personal  property  for  that  year. 

"  No  thoughtful  person  will  deny,  that,  during  the  last 
fifteen  years,  personal  property  has  greatly  increased  in 
this  State  in  comparison  with  real  property  ;  yet  these 
figures  show  the  contrary,  or  prove  that  a  larger  percent- 
age of  personal  property  is  overlooked  for  taxation  to- 
day than  fifteen  or  twenty  years  ago. 

"  The  late  George  H.  Andrews,  for  a  long  time  tax  com- 
missioner in  the  city  of  New  York,  in  an  address  before 
an  Assembly  committee  on  the  6th  of  October,  1774,' 
presented  a  very  clever  table  illustrating  the  inequalities 
and  incongruities  of  our  system  of  taxation.  It  is  as 
follows : 

A  has  $100,000  of  imported  goods,  and  is  exempt. 

B       "           "            miscellaneous  goods,  "         taxed. 

C       "           "            goods  consigned,  "     exempt. 

D      "   '        "            goods  owned,  "         taxed. 

1  The  following  letter  from  ex-Commissioner  of  Taxes   Coleman  explains 
itself  : 

NEW  YORK,  December  26,  1891. 
BOLTON  HALL,  ESQ. 

Dear  Sir ;  Yours  of  the  i6th  received,  with  the  above  memorandum 
attached,  in  relation  to  exemption  of  property  mentioned  by  the  late  Hon. 
George  H.  Andrews.  There  is  no  change  since  that  time  in  relation  to  this 
specific  kind  of  property,  but  several  alterations  are  necessary  on  corporate 
property  on  account  of  the  recent  decisions  of  the  Court  of  Appeals. 
With  kindest  regards,  I  remain, 

Most  respectfully, 

MICHAEL  COLEMAN. 


AN  IMMORAL  FARCE. 


95 


E  has  $100,000  of  goods  manufactured 
in  N.  J., 

F  "  "  of  goods  manufactured 
in  N.  Y.  city, 

G  "  "  of  goods  to  pay  for  which 

he  borrowed  capital 
on  U.  S.  bonds, 

H  "  "  of  goods  which  he  sold 
U.  S.  bonds  to  pay  for, 

I  "  "  in  ships  plying  from 
this  port,  but  regis- 
tered in  Boston, 

J  "  "  in  ships  plying  in  the 
Pacific,  but  registered 
here, 

K  "  "  in  mortgages  in  N.  J. 
property,  interest  paid 
in  Jersey  City,  and 
mortgages  deposited 
there, 

L  "  "  in  mortgages  on  city 
property, 

M      "  money  in  his  pocket, 

N      "  money  in  bank, 

O  "  •'  certificate  of  deposit  in 
Sub-Treasury, 

P  "  "  certificate  of  deposit  in 
bank, 


and  is  exempt, 
taxed. 

"     exempt. 
"         taxed. 

"     exempt, 
taxed. 


"     exempt. 

"         taxed. 

"      exempt. 

taxed. 

"      exempt, 
taxed. 


WHO  PA  YS   YOUR   TAXES? 


Q  has  $100,000  specie     in     the      Assay 

Office, 

R       "          "        specie  in  his  safe, 
S       "          "        check  on  U.  S.  Treasury, 
T       "          "        checks  on  bank, 
U      "          "        Treasury  notes, 
V       "          "        promissory  notes, 
W     "          "        of  U.  S.  bonds, 
X       "          "        of  State  or  city  bonds, 
Y       "          "        in  certificate  of  indebt- 
edness U.  S., 

Z  "  "  in  certificate  of  indebt- 
edness of  a  corpora- 
tion, 


and  is  exempt. 
"  taxed 
11  exempt. 

taxed. 
"  exempt. 

taxed. 
"  exempt. 

taxed. 

"     exempt. 


taxed. 


"  Mr.  Andrews  added,  *  If  the  alphabet  had  been 
longer,  my  statement  had  been  stronger/ 

"  It  must  not  be  supposed  that  the  results  of  the 
attempt  to  tax  personal  property  in  States  where  re- 
turns in  detail  have  been  required  from  the  tax-payers 
have  been  more  satisfactory.  In  Connecticut  that 
system  has  prevailed  for  many  years.  A  special  tax 
commission  recently  reported  in  that  State  the  result  of 
the  workings  of  the  law.  It  was  found  that  notwith- 
standing the  growth  and  increase  of  wealth,  '  the  pro- 
portion of  those  intangible  securities  to  other  taxable 
property  has  steadily  declined  from  year  to  year.  In 
1855  it  was  nearly  ten  per  cent,  of  the  whole  ;  in  1865, 


AN  IMMORAL  FARCE. 


97 


about  seven  and  one-half  per  cent;  in  1875,  a  little  over 
five  per  cent.  ;  and  in  1885,  about  three  and  three  quar- 
ters per  cent.' 

"  The  commission  further  said  : 

"  '  Such  considerations  as  these,  coupled  with  the  results 
of  an  investigation  of  now  nearly  three  years  into  the 
workings  of  our  tax  system,  have  brought  us  to  the  con- 
clusion that  all  items  of  intangible  property  ought  to  be 
struck  out  of  the  list.  As  the  law  stands  it  may  be  a 
burden  upon  the  conscience  of  many,  but  it  is  a  burden 
on  the  property  of  the  few,  not  because  there  are  few 
who  ought  to  pay,  but  because  there  are  few  who  can  be 
made  to  pay.' 

"  I  venture  to  say  that  an  investigation  in  any  State  of 
this  Union,  where  the  most  minute  and  thorough  system 
of  questioning  prevails  with  respect  to  the  ownership  of 
personal  property,  will  show  that,  notwithstanding  the 
great  increase  of  wealth  in  the  last  twenty  years  in 
the  multiplication  of  evidences  of  debt,  the  skill  of  the 
owners  in  concealing  their  property  has  grown  more 
rapidly,  and  that  in  any  State  of  the  Union  in  which  an 
attempt  is  made  to  reach  all  the  personal  property  of  the 
tax-payer,  a  smaller  percentage  of  such  property  is  taxed 
to-day  than  was  reached  by  the  operation  of  the  laws 
twenty  years  ago. 

"  There  is  a  reason  for  this,  in  addition  to  the  unwilling- 
ness of  the  owner  of  personal  property  to  bear  a  burden 
which  can  be  easily  evaded  and  which  is  not  generously 


98  WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

shared  by  his  neighbors.  Apart  entirely  from  this  dis- 
inclination of  an  individual  to  pay  more  than  his  share  of 
taxes,  there  is  an  innate  sense  of  injustice  at  the  effect 
of  our  laws  of  taxation  of  personal  property  in  imposing 
double  taxation.  Few  tax-payers  have  reasoned  the 
matter  out  to  themselves,  but  shrewd  and  capable  busi- 
ness men  have  a  way  of  their  own  of  arriving  at  con- 
victions, the  strength  of  which  is  derived  from  their 
business  instincts  and  not  from  their  study  of  the  under- 
lying principles  of  finance  and  political  economy. 

"  For  instance,  a  merchant  has  a  deposit  in  his  bank  of 
$50,000 ;  that  deposit  is  taxable  in  his  hands  as  a  credit 
and  as  part  of  his  personal  estate.  The  bank  may  have 
loaned  that  $50,000  to  a  Wall  Street  broker  on  the  secur- 
ity of  $50,000  of  railroad  bonds,  and  thus  substantially 
invested  the  money  in  those  bonds.  The  bonds  are  tax- 
able as  part  of  the  personal  estate  of  the  broker.  The 
merchant  may  have  sold  $50,000  of  goods,  and  taken 
back  a  note  for  that  amount  from  his  customer ;  that 
note  is  taxable  in  the  merchant's  hands  as  part  of  his 
personal  estate  ;  the  goods  that  he  has  sold  are  taxable 
in  the  hands  of  the  purchaser  as  part  of  his  personal 
estate.  The  merchant  may  have  sold  a  piece  of  land  for 
$100,000  and  taken  back  a  bond  secured  by  mortgage  of 
$50,000.  The  land  is  taxable  at  its  full  value  of  $100,000, 
and  would  be  assessed  at  that  sum  if  the  assessor  did  his 
duty.  The  merchant  is  taxable  on  the  bond  and  mort- 
gage of  $50,000  as  part  of  his  personal  estate. 


AN  IMMORAL  FARCE. 


99 


"These  injustices  of  double  taxation  are  partially 
cured  in  practice,  first,  by  the  offset  for  indebtedness  in 
the  assessment  of  personal  estate  ;  and,  second,  by  the 
practice  of  assessors  in  assessing  real  estate  at  various 
percentages  of  its  actual  value,  differing  in  different 
localities.  Nevertheless,  I  think  there  is  an  unconscious 
appreciation  in  the  minds  of  business  men  of  the  injustice 
of  our  system  of  taxation  in  attempting  to  tax — 

"  First,  all  visible,  tangible  property  at  its  full  value ; 
and, 

"  Second,  all  credits,  loans,  evidences  of  debt,  including 
bonds  and  promissory  notes. 

"  Intangible  personal  property  is  but  evidence  of  title 
or  right  to  visible,  tangible  property  in  the  hands  of  the 
debtor,  which  in  the  case  of  corporations  is  enhanced  in 
value  by  being  utilized  in  connection  with  corporate 
franchises,  but  in  the  hands  of  individual  debtors  is  the 
sole  source  from  which  must  come  the  means  to  respond 
to  the  obligation.  The  injustice  and  hardship  of  double 
taxation,  dimly  appreciated  as  a  matter  of  principle,  but 
fully  felt  as  a  matter  of  practice,  seems  to  be  responsible 
for  a  vast  amount  of  evasion  of  taxes,  which  is  attributed 
by  theorists  solely  to  the  innate  influence  of  original  sin  in 
men  who  have  taken  the  first  steps  in  wickedness  by  the 
acquisition  of  a  substantial  amount  of  personal  property. 

"  It  must  never  be  forgotten  that  personal  property, 
especially  of  an  invisible,  intangible  character,  is  capable 
of  easy  removal,  and  its  owner  can,  without  difficulty, 


100  WHO  PAYS    YOUR   TAXES? 

change  either  its  location  or  his  place  of  residence.  In- 
deed, the  more  property  of  this  character  he  has,  the 
easier  it  is  for  him  to  submit  to  such  sacrifices  as  would 
be  involved  in  a  change  of  domicile.  No  greater  mis- 
fortune could  happen  to  the  State  of  New  York  than  to 
have  its  system  of  taxing  personal  property  so  stringently 
applied  as  to  successfully  reach  all  personal  property 
within  its  borders.  For  one  year  the  property  might  be 
taxed.  The  next  year  would  see  hundreds  of  millions  of 
capital  withdrawn  from  the  State,  and  flown  with  its 
owners  to  more  congenial  places  of  abode. 

"  What  is  the  remedy  ? 

"  Surely  a  system  which  is  responsible  for  a  vast 
amount  of  perjury;  for  numberless  acts,  annually  com- 
mitted, which  to  the  tax-payer  himself  seem  wrong  and 
a  violation  of  law — for  very  few  tax-payers  are  good 
enough  lawyers  to  appreciate  that  they  are  fully  within 
the  law  and  not  at  all  violating  it  by  evading  their  per- 
sonal taxes — a  system  which  fails  utterly  in  producing 
the  result  that  it  was  intended  to  bring  about,  must  be 
pronounced  to  be  bad,  and  the  system  must  either  be 
improved  so  as  to  be  more  effective  or  be  replaced  by 
some  other  method  of  taxation. 

"  I  urge  that  it  is  perfectly  evident  that  both  of  the  two 
methods  employed  in  the  United  States  to  reach  all  per- 
sonal property,  either  by  exhaustive  returns  under  oath 
— a  most  prolific  source  of  perjury — or  by  the  wild 
guesses  of  the  tax  assessor,  must  be  abandoned  as  im- 


AN  IMMORAL 

practicable,  unwise,  ineffective,  tending  to  demoralize  the 
conscience  of  the  tax-payer,  and  utterly  unfitted  to  ac- 
complish the  desired  result.  It  is  equally  evident,  from 
the  experience  of  our  sister  States,  that  the  system  can- 
not be  improved  so  as  to  be  effective.  Indeed,  the  more 
it  is  improved  the  more  objectionable  it  becomes,  the 
more  it  encourages  perjury  from  the  conscienceless,  and 
drives  from  the  State  the  capital  and  persons  of  the  con- 
scientious. I  admit  that  it  is  useless  to  expect  abolition 
of  the  taxation  of  personal  property  until  some  other 
scheme  has  been  devised  which  can  be  effectively  worked 
so  as  to  produce  the  necessary  taxes  with  the  least  possi- 
ble friction  to  the  tax-payer  and  expense  of  collection, 
and  until  the  public  mind  has  been  sufficiently  educated 
to  accept  it  in  place  of  the  present  antiquated  method 
of  taxing  personal  property. 

"  I  do  not  give  my  adherence  to  the  single  tax  theory, 
maintained  with  such  signal  ability  by  many  of  its  advo- 
cates on  all  occasions.  I  am  free  to  admit,  however,  that 
nothing  but  good  to  the  cause  of  tax  reform  can  come 
from  the  agitation  of  the  subject  by  a  zealous  and  deter- 
mined body  of  educated  and  thinking  men.  If  the  result 
of  their  efforts  shall  be  to  arouse  the  public  mind 
to  thought  upon  the  question  of  taxation  of  real  and 
personal  property,  the  outcome  may  safely  be  trusted  to 
the  conflict  of  opinion  and  the  war  of  ideas,  from  which 
I  have  every  confidence  that  eventually  the  true  solu- 
tion, whatever  that  may  be,  will  successfully  emerge. 


1 02.-  WHO -PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

"  Whether  or  not  the  future  taxation  of  this  State  is  to 
be  on  land  alone,  I  consider  that  nearly  all  thinkers  upon 
this  subject,  who  have  given  it  substantially  any  atten- 
tion, consider  that  the  mainstay  of  any  system  of  taxation, 
for  local  purposes,  at  least,  must  always  be  a  tax  upon 
land  in  some  form,  and  that  the  general  tax  upon  per- 
sonal property  must  eventually  give  way  before  the 
advancing  tide  of  public  information  and  enlightened 
opinion.  It  is  to  be  hoped  that  eventually  we  shall  have 
a  system  under  which  all  State  taxes  will  be  raised  on 
real  estate,  and  such  taxes  as  franchise  taxes  on  corpora- 
tions, supplemented  possibly  by  an  income  tax.  I  trust 
that  the  day  is  not  far  distant  when  the  different  locali- 
ties of  this  State  will  be  at  liberty  to  determine  for  them- 
selves what  shall  be  the  method  of  local  taxation  within 
their  respective  boundaries. 

"  Enlightened  discussion,  fair  argument,  and  vigorous 
prosecution  of  our  different  views  may  finally  result  in 
some  common  ground  being  reached  upon  which  we  can 
all  stand,  and  we  will  doubtless  all  agree  that  the  im- 
mediate result  to  be  attained  is  the  abolition  of  our 
present  antiquated  and  oppressive  system  of  taxation  of 
personal  property." 


CHAPTER   VII. 

ROBBING    ONE   ANOTHER.1 

Personal  taxation  breeds  liars  and  perjurers. — Taxation  in  Ohio. — Real 
estate  taxation  would  help  the  farmer. — Valuable  real  estate  found 
chiefly  in  cities  and  towns. — Personal  property  in  cities  escapes  taxa- 
tion; in  the  country  it  is  reached  by  the  assessor. — Startling  figures. — 
Statistics  prove  the  same  thing,  however  approached. — Specific  cases. — 
The  tax  on  watches,  on  carriages,  and  on  money  in  bank. — Theorists 
who  are  practical,  and  practical  men  who  are  bad  theorists. — The  case 
of  New  York. — How  personal  property  melted  away  under  taxation  in 
California. — Taxation  on  real  estate  alone  the  remedy. 

THERE  is  no  more  persistent  notion  than  that  the 
taxation  of  personal  property  will  transfer  the  burdens  of 
government  to  corporations,  and  relieve  various  classes 
of  the  community,  especially  the  farmers,  from  taxation 
that  they  are  little  able  to  bear. 

If  anything  in  human  experience,  as  applied  to  meth- 
ods of  taxation,  is  settled,  it  certainly  is  the  fact  that 
taxation  upon  personal  property  never  can  be  made  a 
success.  Taxes  can  be  raised  from  personal  property,  no 
doubt,  for  large  sums  are  thus  raised ;  but  that  they 
cannot  be  levied  with  any  reasonable  approach  to  accu- 

1  This  chapter  is  Mr.  T.  G.  Shearman's  lecture  before  the  Ohio  legis- 
lature about  three  years  ago,  revised  by  himself  for  this  work. 


104  WHO  PAYS  YOUR   TAXES? 

racy  or  equality  is  demonstrated,  not  only  by  conclu- 
sive reasoning,  but  by  the  more  conclusive  fact  that  they 
never  have  been  thus  levied.  It  is  not  for  want  of  ear- 
nest and  long-sustained  effort  that  the  failure  of  this 
system  of  taxation  has  come  to  pass.  For  centuries  the 
effort  has  been  made,  and  for  at  least  six  centuries  it  was 
backed  by  all  the  power  of  a  government  which  com- 
manded the  whole  civilized  world  and  which  armed  its 
tax-gatherers  not  with  the  paltry  weapons  of  oaths  and 
penalties,  but  with  the  more  substantial  powers  of  indis- 
criminate search,  the  lash,  the  rack,  the  thumbscrew,  the 
gridiron,  and  the  cross.  The  Roman  Empire  fell  to  pieces 
under  the  pressure  of  this  vain  effort  to  reach  personal 
property  by  taxation.  The  same  thing  was  attempted, 
at  a  later  period,  in  dealing  with  the  Jews.  It  failed 
with  them.  They  could  be  robbed  and  murdered,  but 
they  could  not  be  regularly  taxed. 

That  which  all  the  tremendous  power  of  Rome  in  its 
grandest  days  failed  to  accomplish,  that  which  the  in- 
fernal tortures  of  Spain  could  not  accomplish  when  it 
beheaded  hundreds,  burned  thousands,  and  massacred 
tens  of  thousands,  letting  loose  a  brutal  soldiery  in  the 
vain  struggle  to  tax  the  Netherlands,  the  American 
people  are  still  apparently  convinced  that  they  can  ac- 
complish by  distributing  blank  forms,  administering  long 
oaths,  and  threatening  penalties  of  fifty  per  cent.  How 
far  they  have  succeeded,  the  late  governor  of  Ohio  has  set 
forth  in  repeated  messages,  as  the  governors  of  New 


ROBBING   ONE  ANOTHER.  105 

York  have  for  many  years  set  forth  in  theirs.  Their 
complaints  have  become  monotonous  in  their  uniformity. 
Nothing,  indeed,  has  been  added  to  the  sum  of  knowledge 
on  this  point  since  the  calm  and  detailed  report  of 
David  A.  Wells  to  the  New  York  legislature  in  1871,  in 
which  the  experience  of  that  State  and  many  other  States 
was  luminously  set  forth,  and  it  was  made  clear  that 
taxes  on  personal  property  were  nowhere  equally  as- 
sessed or  efficiently  collected. 

The  result  of  the  widespread  maintenance  of  these 
taxes  is  to  fill  the  land  with  liars  and  perjurers.  In  some 
States,  the  business  of  perjury  is  mostly  confined  to  the 
assessors,  who  regularly  make  returns  which  they  know 
to  be  false,  but  cannot  make  true.  In  others,  such  as 
Ohio,  Vermont,  and  Connecticut,  perjury  is  the  business 
of  the  tax-payers.  Their  scrupulous  consciences,  in 
many  cases,  find  a  way  of  escape  by  omitting,  in  fact,  to 
take  the  oath  which  they  sign,  and  they  are  innocent  of 
everything  except  lying.  The  delicately  conscientious 
get  some  one  to  sign  for  them,  and,  where  an  oath  is 
absolutely  required,  a  considerate  notary  certifies  to  the 
oath  before  it  is  taken,  after  which,  of  course,  it  is  not 
taken  at  all.  On  surveying  the  whole  field,  however, 
one's  faith  in  American  truthfulness  is  cheered,  and  we 
entertain  larger  hopes  for  the  future  of  humanity.  For 
it  appears  that  where  the  blanks  are  diligently  circu- 
lated, and  the  oath  insisted  upon,  the  average  man  will 
return  ten,  if  not  fifteen,  per  cent,  of  his  invisible  prop- 


I06  WHO  PAYS    YOUR 

erty  ;  whereas,  in  the  absence  of  this  appeal  to  piety,  he 
will  return  nothing  at  all.  This  touching  proof  of  Ameri- 
can reverence  for  the  sacredness  of  the  oath  reminds  one 
of  the  famous  Yankee,  who,  hearing  his  father  accused  of 
having  falsely  warranted  the  quality  of  a  trifle  sold  for 
twelve  and  a  half  cents,  replied  :  "  No  ;  the  old  man  would 
never  tell  a  lie  for  ninepence,  though  he  would  tell  eight 
of  'em  for  a  dollar." 

Of  course  there  are  some  forms  of  personal  property 
which  can  be  seen  and  appraised  by  the  assessors  almost 
as  readily  as  real  estate,  though  not  with  so  correct  an 
estimate  of  value.  The  objection  to  taxation  of  chattels 
is  not  that  none  of  them  can  be  taxed :  it  is  that  so  many 
of  them  can  be  and  are  reached,  while  so  many  are  not, 
that  the  tax  is  necessarily  unequal  and  unjust.  The  im 
portant  question,  therefore,  is,  upon  what  class  does  this 
tax  bear  most  oppressively?  If  taxes  were  levied  only 
upon  real  estate,  would  the  smaller  property-owners,  and 
especially  the  farmers,  pay  more  or  less  of  the  whole  taxes 
than  tl^ey  pay  now  ? 

Farmers  generally  have  been  long  convinced  that  the 
rigid  taxation  of  personal  property  would  relieve  their 
burdens,  and  it  is  by  their  votes  that  the  existing  system 
is  maintained.  This  is  all  theory  on  their  part.  They 
have  not  studied  the  facts  and  know  nothing  about 
them.  They  assume  that  "it  must  be  so." 

But  let  us  study  the  facts  before  discussing  any  theory. 
The  assessment  returns  of  Ohio  furnish  all  the  facts 


ROBBING   ONE  ANOTHER.  IO/ 

which  are  needed  in  order  to  determine  whether  taxa- 
tion on  personal  property  is  of  any  benefit  to  the  agri- 
cultural community. 

Any  attempt  to  separate  the  community  into  two  dis- 
tinct classes,  one  of  which  is  taxable  only  on  real  estate, 
and  the  other  of  which  is  taxable  only  on  personal  prop- 
erty, is  obviously  impossible  and  absurd.  No  man  is  ever 
reached  by  the  tax-gatherer  who  does  not  occupy  some 
piece  of  land.  If  he  did  not,  the  tax-collector  would 
never  find  him.  Tramps  pay  no  direct  taxes.  Neither 
can  any  man  live  without  occupying  some  improvements 
on  real  estate  and  possessing  some  personal  property. 
Every  tax-payer,  without  exception,  is  an  occupant  of 
land  and  improvements  upon  land,  and  an  owner  of  per- 
sonal property.  The  only  selfish  interest  which  any 
tax-payer  has  in  deciding  between  rival  systems  of  taxa- 
tion is  to  know  which  will  produce  a  sufficient  revenue 
to  the  state  with  the  smallest  possible  burden  to  him. 
In  considering,  therefore,  the  interest  of  any  class,  such 
as  farmers,  the  real  question  to  be  answered  is  not 
whether  they  in  fact  own  more  or  less  personal  property 
than  merchants,  bankers,  and  money  lenders.  It  is,  first, 
whether  they  own  more  personal  property  in  proportion 
to  the  value  of  their  land  than  do  those  other  classes  ; 
and,  second,  whether  the  particular  kinds  of  personal 
property  which  they  own  are  more  easily  reached  by  the 
tax-gatherer  than  are  the  kinds  of  property  owned  by 
the  other  classes.  The  state  must  raise  a  certain  fixed 


108  W00  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

amount  for  public  purposes.  This  amount  it  will  assess 
upon  all  the  tax-payers  in  proportion  to  the  value  of 
their  property  as  reported  by  the  assessors,  not  in  pro- 
portion to  its  real  value,  which  the  assessors,  of  course, 
are  never  able  exactly  to  ascertain.  If,  therefore,  ex- 
perience proves  that  assessors  are  able  to  find  twenty 
times  as  much  land  value  in  the  possession  of  merchants 
as  they  can  among  farmers,  but  only  ten  times  as  much 
personal  property  among  merchants  as  they  find  among 
farmers,  it  is  a  plain  result,  as  simple  as  the  rule  of  three, 
that  the  taxation  of  personal  property  will  end  in  making 
farmers  pay  a  larger  proportion  of  the  taxes  than  they 
would  pay  if  all  taxes  were  concentrated  on  land. 

Now  the  average  farmer,  no  doubt,  says  at  once  that 
this  is  impossible.  He  owns,  we  will  say,  a  hundred 
acres  of  land,  and  he  knows  of  no  merchant  in  any  of  the 
great  cities  who  owns  so  much  as  one  acre.  He  owns 
neither  stock  nor  bonds,  and  has  only  $500  in  the  bank. 
He  knows  of  a  thousand  merchants  or  money  lenders 
who  each  own  $100,000  or  $1,000,000  in  stocks  and  bonds, 
and  keep  balances  of  $50,000  in  the  bank.  He  asserts, 
therefore,  that  it  is  a  matter  of  plain  common-sense  that 
the  exemption  of  personal  property  from  taxation  must 
increase  his  burden,  so  as  to  make  him  pay  a  hundred 
times  as  much  as  the  merchant  and  banker. 

But  the  farmer,  in  reasoning  thus,  entirely  overlooks 
the  most  important  facts  of  the  problem,  and  abandons 
the  common-sense  of  which  he  so  much  boasts.  That 


ROBBING  ONE  ANOTHER. 

common-sense  would  tell  him  that,  just  as  his  hundred 
acres  are  worth  to  him  far  more  than  a  hundred  thousand 
acres  in  the  midst  of  Africa  would  be,  so  one-tenth  of  an 
acre  in  the  heart  of  Cincinnati  is  worth  more  than  all  his 
farm.  It  would  also  tell  him  that  the  assessor  can  easily 
count  his  cattle,  horses,  sheep,  and  hogs,  and  estimate 
pretty  correctly  their  value,  whereas  the  most  expert 
assessor  can  never  find  out  how  many  bonds  the  banker 
owns,  unless  he  can  persuade  that  banker  to  tell  him ; 
while  in  estimating  the  value  of  the  banker's  furniture, 
he  might  guess  at  $10,000,  $25,000,  or  $50,000,  with  a 
perfectly  equal  chance  of  being  right  or  wrong  in  either 
case.  The  banker  has  chairs  standing  side  by  side,  ap- 
parently of  exactly  equal  value,  but  one  of  which  cost 
$25  and  the  other  $250.  He  has  two  paintings,  one  of 
which  is  five  times  as  large  as  the  other,  and  which  the 
honest  farmer  might  therefore  think  to  be  five  times  as 
valuable,  whereas,  in  fact,  the  large  picture  is  barely  worth 
$500,  while  the  small  one  would  sell  as  quick  as  lightning 
for  $20,000.  There  are  many  houses,  in  large  cities,  upon 
the  interior  decoration  of  which  the  owners  have  each 
spent  more  than  $100,000.  The  most  experienced  as- 
sessors would  fail  to  discover  that  these  decorations  were 
really  more  costly  than  those  in  adjoining  houses,  which 
in  fact  did  not  cost  one-tenth  of  that  amount. 

Nor  is  the  difficulty  of  this  problem  confined  to  the 
difficulty  which  the  assessor  finds  in  doing  his  work. 
Vast  amounts  of  what  is  commonly  called  personal 


IIO  WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

property,  and,  indeed,  the  bulk  of  those  things  which  the 
average  farmer  seeks  to  tax  as  personal  property,  consist 
of  really  nothing  but  rights  over  real  estate.  Thus  the 
stock  of  railroad  corporations,  when  it  has  any  value, 
consists  very  largely  in  the  land  which  the  company 
covers  by  its  tracks,  engine-houses,  stations,  etc.,  and  the 
bonds  of  such  corporations  represent  practically  nothing 
else.  The  franchises  of  such  corporations,  which,  of 
course,  constitute  a  large  part  of  the  value  of  both  stocks 
and  bonds,  really  consist  of  nothing  but  the  right  to  use 
certain  tracts  of  land  to  the  exclusion  of  all  other  per- 
sons. Under  a  system  of  taxation  assessed  on  the  value 
of  land,  those  franchises  would  be  assessed  at  their  full 
value,  because  the  franchise  of  exclusive  use  is  all  that 
gives  to  any  land  its  commercial  value.  The  system  of 
taxation  upon  real  estate  alone  would,  therefore,  levy 
taxes  upon  every  dollar  which  corporate  franchises  are 
worth.  No  system  of  taxation  on  personal  property 
is  needed  in  the  smallest  degree  for  this  purpose.  It  is 
indeed  only  a  hindrance  to  it  and  a  convenient  means  of 
evading  taxation ;  for  the  assessor,  not  being  allowed  to 
compute  this  value  in  estimating  the  value  of  the  land, 
has  to  take  his  chances  of  rinding  it  under  the  name  of 
personal  property.  All  mortgages  on  land  are,  of  course, 
practically,  interests  in  the  land  itself,  and  would  be  fully 
taxed  under  a  system  of  taxation  confined  to  the  value 
of  the  land  alone. 

In  the  light  of  these  considerations,  let  us  review  some 


ROBBING   ONE  ANOTHER.  \\\ 

of  the  statistics  furnished  from  year  to  year  by  the 
official  reports  of  assessors  in  Ohio,  as  compiled  annually 
in  the  auditor's  report.  For  the  purpose  of  such  com- 
parison, let  us  set  on  one  side  the  four  counties  which  in- 
clude all  the  largest  cities,  and  on  the  other  side  the  five 
counties  which  contain  the  smallest  proportion  of  city 
population  among  all  the  counties  of  Ohio. 

The  former,  which  we  will  call  the  city  counties,  include 
Hamilton,  Cuyahoga,  Franklin,  and  Lucas,  with  the  cities 
of  Cincinnati,  Cleveland,  Columbus,  and  Toledo. 

The  latter,  which  we  will  call  the  rural  counties,  are 
Geauga,  Noble,  Carroll,  Medina,  and  Monroe. 

These  counties  respectively  represent  the  extreme  con- 
trasts between  the  cities  and  the  farms  of  the  State. 
Thus,  in  Hamilton  and  Cuyahoga  the  assessed  value  of 
town  lots  is  about  seven  times  the  assessed  value  of  the 
farms,  whereas  in  the  five  rural  counties  the  assessed 
value  of  farms  is  nowhere  less  than  ten  times  that  of 
town  lots,  while  in  Geauga  County  the  farm  lots  are 
worth  twenty-seven  times  as  much  as  the  town  lots. 
Hamilton  County,  which  includes  Cincinnati,  is  the  typical 
city  county  of  Ohio,  while  Geauga,  which  includes  no 
large  town,  is  the  typical  rural  county. 

The  first  thing  which  strikes  the  eye  on  looking  over  the 
statistics  of  these  counties  is  the  following  comparison : 

Assessed  valuation     Assessed  valuation 
of  Real  Estate.  of  Chattels. 

City  counties    $317,854,665        $113,340,087 

Rural  counties    29,733,450  14,307,668 


112  WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

Any  one  can  see  that,  in  the  counties  which  include  all 
the  large  cities,  the  assessed  value  of  personal  property  is 
only  about  one-fourth  of  the  whole  assessment,  while  in 
the  rural  counties  personal  property  constitutes  very 
nearly  one-third  of  their  whole  assessed  value.  In  more 
exact  figures  the  value  of  assessed  personal  property  in 
the  city  counties  is  26^  per  cent,  of  the  whole,  while  in 
the  rural  counties  it  is  32^  per  cent.  If,  therefore,  all 
personal  property  should  be  exempted  from  taxation,  the 
farmers  of  these  five  exclusively  rural  counties  would 
pay  eight  per  cent,  less  taxes  than  they  do  now. 

That  this  result  is  not  a  mere  accident,  owing  to  some 
peculiar  condition  of  these  particular  counties,  is  easily 
proved  by  testing  the  same  question  in  other  ways. 
Thus,  if  we  set  apart  the  four  great  city  counties  and 
compare  them  with  all  the  rest  of  the  State,  including 
farming  districts  and  smaller  towns  indiscriminately,  we 
find  substantially  the  same  result,  as  follows : 

Personal 
Real  Estate.  Property. 

City  counties $317,854,665       $113,340,087 

Remainder  of  State 867,154,960         406,832,007 

Here,  in  the  counties  which  include  all  the  great  cities, 
personal  property  amounts  to  26j{  per  cent,  of  the 
whole  valuation  ;  while  in  the  remainder  of  the  State  it 
amounts  to  32  per  cent. 

But  if  we  compare  single  counties,  such  as  Hamilton, 
in  which  town  lots  compose  about  85  per  cent,  of  all  the 
real  estate,  with  Medina,  in  which  town  lots  compose 


ROBBING  ONE  ANOTHER.  113 

only  10  per  cent,  of  the  real  estate,  we  find  the  result  as 
follows : 

Personal 
Real  Estate.  Property. 

Hamilton    $163,732,580         $53,144,182 

Medina    8,304,740  5,012,304 

Here  we  find  that  the  real  estate  of  Hamilton  County 
is  assessed  at  twenty  times  the  value  of  Medina  County, 
while  the  personal  property  of  Hamilton  is  assessed  at  less 
than  eleven  times  that  of  Medina.  More  exactly,  personal 
property  constitutes  24^  per  cent  of  the  valuation  of 
Hamilton,  and  37^  per  cent,  of  the  valuation  of  Medina. 
The  total  exemption  of  personal  property  from  taxation, 
therefore,  would,  if  taxes  were  divided  only  between  the 
counties  of  Hamilton  and  Medina,  relieve  the  farmers  of 
Medina  from  16^3  per  cent,  or  exactly  one-sixth  of  their 
present  burdens.  This  is  probably  an  extreme  case,  but 
not  a  single  instance  has  been  yet  found  in  which  a  rural 
county  would  not  find  its  burdens  diminished,  in  com- 
parison with  those  borne  by  Cincinnati,  if  personal  prop- 
erty were  exempted  from  taxation. 

But  let  us  test  this  question  in  still  other  ways.  The 
chief  clamor  in  favor  of  taxing  personal  property  has 
been  directed  toward  the  taxation  of  moneys  and  cred- 
its ;  and  the  money  lender  who  is  supposed  to  have  vast 
sums  on  deposit  in  bank,  and  the  merchant  who  is  sup- 
posed to  have  vast  outstanding  credits  due  from  the 
poor  farmers,  are  the  special  objects  against  whom  this 

method  of  taxation  is  aimed — all  for  the  relief  of  the 
8 


114  WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

farmers.  Let  us  see  how  this  works,  by  a  comparison  of 
the  same  typical  counties.  The  auditor's  report  for  1887 
shows  that  their  relative  assessments  were  as  follows  : 

Real  Estate.  Moneys.  Credits,  etc. 

City  counties $317,854,665       $5,328,050       $13,291,833 

Rural  counties 29,733,450  907,829  4,384,381 

Roughly  stated,  it  thus  appears  that,  if  taxation  were 
confined  to  real  estate  alone,  the  city  counties  would  pay 
eleven  times  as  much  as  the  rural  counties  ;  whereas,  if 
taxation  were  levied  on  money  alone,  they  would  pay 
less  than  six  times  as  much,  and  if  levied  on  credits  alone, 
a  little  more  than  three  times  as  much  ;  while  if  taxation 
were  levied  on  both  money  and  credits,  they  would  pay 
about  four  times  as  much.  Consequently,  the  burden  of 
taxation  in  rural  counties,  as  compared  with  the  large 
cities,  is  nearly  twice  as  heavy  on  money  as  it  is  on  real 
estate,  and  nearly  three  times  as  heavy  on  money,  loans, 
and  credits  of  all  kinds  taken  together.  The  only  result, 
therefore,  of  taxing  moneys,  credits,  and  similar  invest- 
ments, is  to  relieve  the  burden  of  the  cities  and  increase  the 
burden  of  the  farms. 

Let  us  test  this  particular  illustration  by  comparing 
the  county  of  Hamilton,  in  which  the  town  lots  are 
worth  seven  times  as  much  as  the  farming  lands,  with 
Geauga,  in  which  the  farm  lands  are  worth  twenty-seven 
times  as  much  as  the  town  lots : 

Real  Estate.  Moneys.  Credits. 

Hamilton $162,732,580       $1,833,279         $5,735,945 

Geauga    5,555,800  282,118  534.477 


ROBBING  ONE  ANOTHER.  115 

Roughly  stated,  Hamilton  County  is  assessed  for  nearly 
thirty  times  as  much  real  estate,  less  than  seven  times  as 
much  money,  and  less  than  eleven  times  as  much  credits 
as  Geauga  County.  If  taxation  were  levied  exclusively 
upon  money  in  hand,  Geauga  County  would  pay  between 
four  and  five  times  as  much  as  it  would  if  the  taxes  were 
levied  exclusively  on  real  estate.  If  taxes  were  levied 
solely  upon  credits,  Geauga  would  pay  nearly  three  times 
as  much  as  it  would  if  they  were  levied  solely  on  real 
estate.  There  is  not  much  evidence  here  of  any  advan- 
tage gained  by  the  average  farmer  through  his  diligent 
search  after  the  money  lender  and  the  creditor. 

For  many  years,  and,  in  fact,  persistently  ever  since 
1846,  when  Ohio  adopted  the  present  system  of  taxation, 
Ohio  farmers  have  been  clamoring  more  and  more  loudly 
for  protection  from  unjust  taxation,  for  greater  burdens 
upon  merchants  and  bankers,  and  for  more  stringent 
enforcement  of  the  law.  The  tax  and  assessment  laws 
have  been  amended  again  and  again,  in  obedience  to  this 
demand,  and  state  officers  have  been  continually  more 
persistent  in  their  efforts  to  shift  the  burden  of  taxation 
from  farmers  to  capitalists  by  means  of  a  rigorous  enforce- 
ment of  taxation  upon  personal  property.  Let  us, 
therefore,  inquire  whether  there  is  any  tendency  to  im- 
provement in  these  respects,  and  whether  the  history  of 
the  last  few  years  encourages  the  hope  that  the  evasions 
of  the  "  Shylocks  "  can  be  put  an  end  to,  and  the  honest 
farmer  relieved,  by  a  more  thorough  assessment  of  per- 


U6  WHO  PAYS  YOUR   TAXES? 

sonal  property.     For  this  purpose,  let  us  again  compare 
the  typical  counties  of  Hamilton  and  Geauga — the  former 
having  an  almost  exclusively  city  population,  and  the  lat 
ter  being  occupied  almost  exclusively  by  farmers. 

If  there  are  any  items  in  which  the  Shylocks  ought  to 
make  a  better  showing  than  the  farmers,  surely  watches, 
pleasure  carriages,  money  on  hand,  and  credits  would 
stand  first  on  the  list.  Let  us  take  them  in  succession  : 

Number  of  Watches.  1882.  1887. 

Ohio 118,286  114,631 

Hamilton 9,283  8,659 

Geauga 845  922 

These  statistics  tell  a  sorrowful  tale  of  poverty  and 
destitution  among  the  poor  farmers  of  Cincinnati ;  while 
they  indicate  that  the  bloated  capitalists  of  Geauga  County 
are  the  chief  patrons  of  the  fine  watchmakers  of  Paris  and 
Geneva.  Let  us  turn  from  this  sorrowful  picture  to 

Pleasure  Carriages.                                                              1882.  1887. 

Ohio 254,918  224,440 

Hamilton   iS^o  9,854 

Geauga 2,488  1,717 

Here  one  finds  some  slight  relief,  not,  indeed,  in  the 
increasing  prosperity  of  any  part  of  Ohio,  but  in  the  fact 
that  the  poor  farmers  of  Cincinnati  do  not  seem  to  have 
given  up  any  larger  proportion  of  their  pleasure  carriages 
than  the  Shylocks  of  Geauga ;  while  a  desolating  wave  of 
poverty  has  swept  over  the  entire  State,  resulting  in  the 
loss  of  nearly  one-eighth  of  all  the  carriages  in  the  State. 
Let  us  look  at 


ROBBING   ONE  ANOTHER.  \\>j 

Money  on  hand.  1882.  1887. 

Ohio $46,160,629  $35,132,131 

Hamilton 2,321,502  1,833,279 

Geauga 352,053  282,118 

Here,  again,  a  wave  of  poverty  has  flooded  the  whole 
State,  in  tolerably  equal  proportions.  Money  is  evidently 
rapidly  vanishing,  for  the  total  stock  of  the  State  has 
fallen  off  $1 1,000,000  in  five  years,  diminishing  twenty-five 
per  cent,  in  Hamilton,  but  only  twenty  per  cent,  in  Geauga. 
We  will  now  look  at 

Credits.  1882.  1887. 

Ohio $104,838,938  106,173,894 

Hamilton 6,571,829  5,735,945 

Geauga 560,693  534,477 

Here  we  see  that  Ohio,  as  a  State,  is  a  money  lender  to 
the  extent  of  one  per  cent,  more  in  1887  than  in  1882. 
But  again  the  poor  agriculturists  of  Cincinnati  come  to 
the  front  with  a  loss  of  $836,000,  or  12^  per  cent,  of  their 
total  stock ;  while  the  loss  in  Geauga  County  is  only 
about  one-third  as  much,  or  a  trifle  over  four  per  cent. 

In  reviewing  this  sad  picture  of  decline,  one  is  reminded 
of  Goldsmith's  melancholy  words  : 

"Where  wealth  accumulates  and  men  decay." 

But  in  Ohio,  it  appears  that  men  accumulate  and 
wealth  decays  ;  for  the  population  of  the  State  has  largely 
increased,  while  apparently  its  wealth  is  ebbing  away. 
Truly  was  it  said  by  the  wise  man  of  old,  that  "  riches 
have  wings,"  for  the  disappearance  of  money  from  Ohio 
conclusively  proves  it.  Looking  at  the  returns  of  car- 


Il8  WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

riages,  one  is  tempted  to  think  that  the  principal  reason 
why  they  have  wheels  is  to  enable  the  owners  to  take 
them  out  of  Ohio ;  and  as  for  the  watches,  they  are  cer- 
tainly not  open  to  the  accusation  so  often  brought  against 
French  clocks,  that  they  will  "  never  go."  Ohio  watches 
certainly  can  and  do  "  go,"  with  a  rapidity  and  steadiness 
not  often  equaled. 

Figures  like  these  might  be  collected  not  only  from 
the  statistics  of  Ohio,  but  from  those  of  every  State  and 
country  under  the  sun  where  statistics  are  kept  and 
personal  property  is  taxed.  They  are  the  moon-struck 
theorists,  who,  in  contradiction  of  all  the  facts  and  all  the 
experience  of  the  world,  persist  in  the  vain  endeavor  to 
tax  personal  property,  and  in  the  absurd  assertion  that 
this  form  of  taxation  tends  to  relieve  farmers. 

Farmers  cannot  conceal  their  sheep  and  oxen,  their 
plows  and  implements ;  and  they  have  enormous  diffi- 
culty in  concealing  their  wealth  in  any  form,  because 
their  affairs  are  so  well  known  to  all  their  neighbors.  If 
they  have  any  money  in  bank,  all  the  village  knows  it. 
If  they  have  loaned  money  or  sold  goods  on  credit,  their 
debtor  is  pretty  sure  to  be  some  one  in  the  immediate 
neighborhood,  and  all  the  circumstances  are  known  to 
fifty  people.  The  average  farmer,  when  making  his 
returns  to  the  assessor,  is  afraid  to  understate  his  wealth 
very  greatly,  because  he  could  hardly  look  the  assessor 
in  the  face  after  doing  so  ;  being  conscious  that,  if  the 
assessor  does  not  already  know  the  truth,  he  can  with 


ROBBING   ONE  ANOTHER.  1 19 

very  little  difficulty  find  it  out  for  himself.  But  in  large 
towns  and  cities  scarcely  any  man  knows,  intimately,  the 
affairs  of  his  neighbor ;  and  the  assessor  knows  least  of 
all.  People  are  reputed  to  be  worth  $1,000,000,  who  in 
reality  are  not  worth  $50,000 ;  and  others  are  reputed  to 
be  worth  only  $100,000,  who  in  reality  are  worth  $2,000,- 
ooo.  Even  if  the  amount  of  any  man's  wealth  is  approxi- 
mately known,  none  of  his  neighbors  know  how  that 
wealth  is  invested,  unless  it  is  put  in  real  estate.  The 
assessor,  therefore,  has  absolutely  no  means  of  ascertain- 
ing the  value  of  any  man's  personal  property,  except  by 
returns  from  that  man  himself,  or  from  the  corporations 
with  whom  he  may  happen  to  invest.  If  an  Ohio  man 
makes  his  principal  investments  in  corporations  outside 
of  the  State,  the  assessor  is  entirely  at  the  mercy  of  the 
tax-payer.  He  can  tell  any  number  of  lies  with  impunity. 
The  assessor  rarely  or  never  examines  his  books  of 
account ;  and,  if  assessors  once  began  to  make  such  an 
examination,  many  rich  men  would  cease  to  keep  books 
of  account  at  all,  as  it  is  notorious  that  they  did  when 
the  income  tax  was  in  existence.  All  things  combine  to 
make  it  easy  for  the  assessor  to  reach  the  farmer's  per- 
sonal property,  and  difficult  for  him  to  reach  that  of  the 
merchant,  banker,  or  city  capitalist. 

How  is  it  in  the  State  of  New  York?  One  of  the 
most  experienced  assessors  in  that  State,  Mr.  George  H. 
Andrews,  addressing  a  legislative  committee  on  October 
6,  1874,  said: 


I2O  WHO    PAYS   YOUR   TAXES? 

"  No  man  and  no  corporation,  banks  only  excepted, 
need  pay  a  tax  upon  personal  property.  Widows  and 
orphans  must  pay.  Upon  them,  in  the  extremity  of 
their  distress,  the  law  lays  its  heavy  hand.  It  bereaves 
the  bereaved.  Moribund  itself,  it  has  an  affinity  for  the 
effects  of  the  dead.  The  records  of  the  surrogate  fur- 
nish the  schedule,  and  the  machinery  of  the  law  used  in 
adjusting  an  estate  is  not  sufficiently  flexible  to  regularly 
permit  such  a  transfer  of  securities  as  would  insure  an 
exemption." 

As  might  well  be  expected,  the  State  assessors,  on 
January  21,  1874,  reported  "  that  less  than  fifteen  per 
cent,  of  the  personal  property  of  the  State,  liable  to  tax- 
ation, finds  a  place  on  the  rolls  of  the  assessor,  and  that 
of  mortgages  not  over  five  per  cent,  of  the  value  is 
assessed."  In  one  town,  the  proceeds  of  a  single  auction 
sale  of  cattle,  belonging  to  one  resident,  amounted  to 
$360,000 ;  while  the  whole  assessment  of  personal  prop- 
erty in  that  town  was  $28,850,  "  a  sum  very  much  less 
than  that  obtained  for  one  cow."  The  assessors  say: 
"  A  large  percentage  of  all  the  personal  property  assessed 
is  found  entered  on  the  rolls  to  women,  minor  heirs,  luna- 
tics, who  cannot  watch  with  the  eagle  eye  of  business 
men,  or  to  trustees  or  guardians."  In  some  towns,  these 
classes  hold  more  than  one-half  of  all  the  personal  prop- 
erty on  the  assessment  roll.  Two  widows  residing  in 
the  village  of  Batavia  were  assessed  for  more  personal 
property  than  all  the  individuals  in  the  neighboring  city 


ROBBING  ONE  ANOTHER.  121 

of  Rochester,  with  a  population  of  70,000.  In  one  town 
a  girl,  mentioned  in  the  assessment  as  a  lunatic,  was 
assessed  $5,000  for  personal  property,  which  the  assessor 
stated  was  the  full  amount  of  her  personal  estate.  All 
over  the  State,  "  the  amount  of  assessments  depends  more 
on  the  will,  craft,  conscience  (or  want  of  conscience)  of  the 
party  assessed  than  upon  the  law  or  its  enforcement." 

Experienced  Ohio  assessors  say  that  the  most  honest 
returns  of  property  are  always  made  by  the  poorer 
classes,  and  the  most  inadequate  returns  by  millionaires ; 
while  widows  who  have  no  experience  in  business,  and 
trustees  who  represent  widows  and  orphans,  are  taxed 
upon  every  dollar  that  they  own. 

The  experience  of  California  furnishes  perhaps  the 
latest  example  of  the  utter  failure  of  all  schemes  for 
taxing  personal  property  to  work  out  anything  like  an 
approximation  to  justice. 

In  1879  a  new  constitution  was  adopted.  It  was  car- 
ried through  solely  by  the  farmers'  votes ;  merchants, 
bankers,  and  capitalists,  whether  large  or  small,  voting 
almost  unanimously  against  it.  Under  this  constitution 
and  these  laws,  not  only  are  bonds,  money,  and  credits 
taxable,  without  any  deduction  on  account  of  debts — ex- 
cept from  credits,  and  then  only  such  debts  as  are  due  to 
residents  of  the  State  of  California — but  holders  of  stock 
in  corporations  are  avowedly  and  intentionally  subjected 
to  double  taxation,  first  upon  the  corporate  property, 
and  again  upon  the  capital  stock,  which  is  merely  their 


122  WHO   PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

evidence  of  title  to  that  property.  It  was  supposed, 
alike  by  the  friends  and  enemies  of  the  new  constitution, 
that  under  its  operation  personal  property  of  every  de- 
scription would  be  thoroughly  reached,  and,  at  any  rate, 
that  whatever  was  by  any  chance  overlooked  would  be 
more  than  made  up  by  double  taxation  upon  that  which 
was  found.  The  actual  result  has  been  to  falsify  all  the 
predictions  of  both  the  friends  and  enemies  of  the  con- 
stitution ;  for  it  has  done  no  good,  and  very  little  harm  ex- 
cept in  promoting  fraud,  for  the  reason  that  the  capacity  of 
the  patriotic  tax-payer  to  commit  perjury,  and  the  suscep- 
tibility of  assessors  to  bribery,  had  been  altogether  under- 
estimated. Some  of  the  results  are  positively  ludicrous. 
If  the  assessment  returns  are  to  be  believed,  in  nine- 
tenths  of  California  there  is  not  a  pound  of  butter ;  in 
four-fifths  of  the  State  the  sheep  do  not  produce  any 
wool ;  fifty  counties  have  quantities  of  bee-hives,  but 
only  four  have  any  honey  ;  personal  property  is  vanish- 
ing from  San  Francisco ;  loans  of  money  are  becoming 
unknown  in  the  rest  of  the  State  ;  bonds  of  cities  and 
municipalities  of  all  kinds  are  not  held  within  the  State 
to  an  amount  equal  to  one-sixth  of  the  county  bonds 
outstanding  alone ;  and,  finally,  money  has  been  smitten 
by  a  pestilence — two-thirds  of  all  that  there  was  before 
the  adoption  of  the  constitution  having  already  taken  to 
itself  wings  and  the  remainder  being  evidently  on  the 
way.  One  of  the  great  objects  of  the  new  constitution 
was  to  tax  railroad,  telegraph,  and  telephone  companies 


ROBBING  ONE  ANOTHER.  123 

to  the  last  cent  of  their  value.  The  actual  result  has 
been  that  telegraph  and  telephone  companies  are  now 
assessed  for  the  cost  of  less  than  their  bare  poles,  or 
about  $65  per  mile.  The  railroad  companies  resisted 
taxation  for  one  or  two  years ;  at  the  end  of  which,  by  a 
singularly  simultaneous  impulse  of  virtue,  some  thirty 
boards  of  supervisors  directed  their  district  attorneys 
rigorously  to  prosecute  the  railroad  companies  to  the 
uttermost  of  the  law.  Thirty  district  attorneys  forth- 
with hauled  the  railroad  companies  before  the  magistrates 
of  justice.  With  equal  promptness  the  thirty  boards  of 
supervisors  met,  and,  without  any  consultation  with  each 
other,  passed  resolutions  directing  the  district  attorneys 
to  compromise  all  suits  at  sixty  per  cent,  of  the  amount 
claimed  ;  and  the  thirty  district  attorneys  obeyed  before 
the  State  officers  could  put  in  a  protest. 

The  following  table  will  show  the  working  of  a  series 
of  measures  which  were  expected,  above  all  things,  to 
increase  the  burdens  of  taxation  upon  San  Francisco,  on 
personal  property  and  especially  on  money.  For  con- 
venience, thousands  are  omitted  in  this  table,  and  the 
figures  "ooo"  must  be  added  in  every  case: 

IN   THOUSANDS    OF   DOLLARS. 

Personal 

Improve-      property, 
ments  on  not 

1880.  Land.  land.  money.  Money.          Total. 

San  Francisco 122,030        42,969        68,584         19,747         253-33O 

Remainder  of  State.  ..227,127        68,568        81,072          4,931        381,698 

349,157      ni,537      i49»656        24,678        635,028 


I24 


WHO  PAYS  YOUR   TAXES? 


IN   THOUSANDS   OF   DOLLARS. 


Personal 

Improve-     property, 
merits  on  not 

1886.  Land.  land.  money.  Money.         Total. 

San  Francisco 120,375         55,034         48,705  6,188         230,302 

Remainder  of  State... 340, 2 74       100,775        94,022          2,887         537,953 


460,649         155,809       142,727         9>°75         768,255 

In  the  foregoing  table,  no  account  is  taken  of  railroads, 
which  are  separately  assessed  by  State  officers.  There 
was  an  increase  in  the  valuation  of  railroads,  from 
$31,174,000  in  1880  to  $48,051,000  in  1886 — of  course 
nearly  all  outside  of  San  Francisco. 

In  reviewing  this  table  it  will  be  seen,  that,  while  im- 
provements upon  land  in  San  Francisco  increased  about 
one-third  in  six  years,  personal  property  other  than 
money  fell  off  nearly  one-third,  and  money  fell  off  more 
than  two-thirds.  In  the  rest  of  the  State,  which  is 
mainly  agricultural,  the  value  of  improvements  increased 
nearly  one-half ;  personal  property  other  than  money 
increased  nearly  one-sixth ;  while  the  loss  of  money 
among  the  farmers,  though  severe,  did  not  compare  with 
the  affliction  which  befell  the  bloated  capitalists  of  San 
Francisco  in  that  respect.  The  general  result  was  to  re- 
duce the  share  of  San  Francisco  in  taxation,  from  40  per 
cent,  to  30  per  cent.  In  other  words,  the  city  paid  25 
per  cent,  less,  and  the  farmers  i6|  per  cent.  more. 

Looking  into  the  details  of  personal  property,  atten- 
tion is  naturally  attracted  toward  the  three  items  of  mer- 
chandise, bonds,  and  credits  ;  on  all  of  which  it  was  sup- 


ROBBING  ONE  ANOTHER.  125 

posed  that  the  new  constitution  would  have  a  great  effect 
in  increasing  the  assessment  of  personal  property.  The 
actual  result  is  as  follows : 

IN   THOUSANDS   OF   DOLLARS. 

1880.  Mdse.  Bonds.          Credits.  Total. 

San  Francisco 16,146         2,311  5,973  24,430 

Remainder  of  State.  ..  .11,504  729         14,740  26,973 


27,650  3,040  20,713  51,403 
1886. 

San  Francisco 15,713  449  6,379  22,541 

Remainder  of  State 15,042  678  6,211  21,931 


30,755         1,127        12,590         44,472 

Although  the  abolition  of  taxes  on  personal  property 
would  result  in  lessening  the  burden  of  farms  and  increas- 
ing that  of  large  towns,  the  inhabitants  of  the  towns 
would  not  be  real  losers  by  such  a  system.  Their  oppor- 
tunities for  development  would  be  vastly  increased. 
They  would  be  released  from  most  of  the  burdens  which 
are  now  imposed  by  taxation  on  improvements  and  in- 
dustry ;  and  the  increase  of  wealth  and  prosperity,  both 
in  town  and  country,  would  proceed  at  an  unprecedented 
rate. 

Why,  then,  should  not  the  whole  attempt  to  tax  per- 
sonal property,  directly,  be  abandoned,  and  the  simple, 
practicable  method  of  concentrating  all  taxes  upon  real 
estate  be  adopted  in  its  place  ?  It  has  been  shown  that 
such  a  system  would  not  work  injustice  to  farmers  or  the 
rural  districts  generally,  because  it  would  not  increase, 
but  would  rather  diminish,  their  present  share  of  taxa- 


126  W&O  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES* 

tion.  Nevertheless,  each  individual  farmer  will  probably 
say  that  he  does  not  own  as  much  personal  property,  in 
proportion  to  the  value  of  his  land,  as  is  owned  by  capi- 
talists in  the  large  cities.  It  is  certain,  however,  that  a 
vast  majority  of  the  farmers  are,  at  any  rate,  assessed  for 
more  personal  property  in  proportion  to  their  land  than 
are  city  residents;  and,  therefore,  it  is  equally  certain 
that  farmers,  if  they  carefully  compared  the  assessments 
upon  themselves  with  the  assessments  on  wealthy  men  in 
cities,  would  find  that  very  few  of  the  latter  are  or  ever 
could  be  assessed  for  as  much  personal  property  in  pro- 
portion to  their  land  as  farmers  are.  Whatever  is  true 
of  all  farmers  taken  together  as  a  class,  must  be  true  of 
the  great  majority  of  them  taken  as  individuals. 


CHAPTER    VIII. 

TAXING    HONESTY    AND    THRIFT. 

An  income  tax  a  coming  possibility. —  It  is  a  fine  on  industry. — Its  effect 
upon  our  commercial  relations  with  foreign  countries. — Destruction  of 
wealth. — Failure  in  practice  of  the  graduated  income  tax. — Germany's 
income  tax. — England's. — What  Mill  says. — Necessarily  an  unequal 
tax. — How  far  an  income  tax  may  be  shifted. — Ordinary  arguments  in 
favor  of  the  income  tax  the  best  evidence  of  its  evils. — Objections 
summed  up. — A  way  out  suggested. 

MANY  persons  who  see  the  folly  of  the  listing  system 
believe  that  an  income  tax  offers  the  best  substitute  for 
present  methods  of  taxation.  Mr.  Joseph  Dana  Miller 
published  in  BelforcTs  Magazine  for  November,  1891,  an 
article  admirably  demonstrating  the  folly  and  injustice  of 
an  income  tax.  Mr.  Miller  writes  from  the  point  of  view 
of  the  absolute  free  trader,  and  would  substitute  for  all 
present  taxes  a  single  tax  on  land  values.  The  Tax  Re- 
form Association  is  not  urging  such  a  substitution,  but 
Mr.  Miller's  article  is  valuable  as  an  argument  against  an 
income  tax,  and,  as  such  only,  it  is  reprinted  here.  Says 
Mr.  Miller: 

"  The  total  abolition  of  the  tariff,  and  the  necessity  of 
resorting  to  some  other  method  of  raising  revenue,  is  not 


128  WHO  PAYS  YOUR   TAXES? 

a  remote  contingency.  The  reduction  qf  the  tariff  to  a 
point  yielding  insufficient  revenue,  when  other  methods 
of  taxation  must  be  considered,  may  not  unlikely  engage 
the  attention  of  the  next  Congress.  At  all  events,  the 
question  of  direct  taxation  is  fast  impending;  and  it  is 
important  to  know  what  is  offered  as  a  substitute  for  the 
imposts  upon  commerce  which  have  hitherto  yielded  the 
greater  portion  of  our  national  revenues. 

"There  will  be  many  members  in  the  Congress  re- 
cently elected  who  are  ready  and  anxious  to  face  the 
alternative  of  no  tariff  at  all  and  some  other  tax,  and  a 
much  greater  number  for  less  tariff  and  new  methods  of 
taxation. 

"  It  is  true  that  commerce  may  to  a  great  extent  be 
freed  without  diminishing,  nay,  with  even  increasing 
revenues  ;  that  in  many  instances  the  placing  of  what 
are  known  as'  raw  materials'  upon  the  free  list,  by  enlarg- 
ing trade  and  increasing  the  volume  of  imports,  will  in- 
crease rather  than  diminish  the  amounts  raised  by  cus- 
toms duties ;  that,  in  brief,  a  tariff  may  be  so  adjusted 
as  to  yield  the  maximum  of  revenue  with  the  mini- 
mum of  duties,  leaving  our  trade  as  free  as  that  of 
England,  and  making  us  more  than  her  rival  in  neutral 
markets. 

"  But  such  a  tariff  would  still  be  a  burden  upon  com- 
merce ;  would  still  bear  with  unequal  weight  upon  the 
poor,  being  as  it  is  a  tax  not  upon  wealth,  but  upon  con- 
sumption; would  still  leave  open  the  doors  to  protec- 


TAXING  HONESTY  AND  THRIFT. 

tionist  schemes  for  raising  needed  revenue,  for  in  all 
the  world  there  is  not  a  so-called  protective  tariff  but  was 
born  of  a  revenue  mother  into  the  hands  of  a  protection 
accoucheur.  And  it  may  be  briefly  indicated,  in  passing, 
that  such  reduction  of  the  tariff  as  would  make  us  once 
again  England's  competitor  would  be  certain  to  induce 
England  to  cast  off  her  remaining  tariff  shackles,  which 
would  give  her  another  leap  forward  in  the  industrial  race 
of  nations,  with  America  once  more  in  the  rear.  So  the 
abolition  of  the  tariff  makes  the  question  of  direct  taxa- 
tion inevitable  before  many  years.  And  such  taxation 
must  be  of  a  kind  to  leave  our  labor  and  capital  the  freest. 
Is  the  income  tax  such  a  tax  ? 

"  The  kind  of  income  tax  most  likely  to  be  imposed 
is  one  exempting  incomes  below  a  certain  fixed  sum.  It 
will  be  assumed  that  incomes  below  one  thousand  dollars 
per  annum  represent  actual  necessities,  and  upon  all 
incomes  in  excess  of  that  sum  government  may  levy  at 
discretion.  Let  us  consider,  first,  the  impolicy  of  such  a 
discriminating  income  tax. 

"  A  tax  exempting  incomes  below  a  certain  fixed  sum 
intensifies  the  effect  which  all  such  taxes  have,  of  oper- 
ating as  fines  upon  industry.  Its  effect  is  precisely  the 
same  as  discrimination  in  railroad  rates  in  favor  of  cer- 
tain localities  to  the  disadvantage  of  competing  centres. 
Such  railroad  discriminations  as,  for  example,  enable 
farmers  at  distances  to  transport  their  wheat  more 
cheaply  than  farmers  nearer  to  the  market,  result  not 
9 


130  WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

solely  to  the  disadvantage  of  individuals,  but,  what  is  not 
so  clearly  apparent,  in  the  actual  destruction  of  wealth. 
Its  effects  are  positive  as  well  as  relative. 

"  Its  operations  may  be  illustrated  in  another  way. 
If  the  United  States  imposed  taxes  on  incomes,  and 
Canada  imposed  none,  and  all  other  things  were  equal, 
the  Canadian  manufacturers  and  merchants  would  have 
an  advantage  in  both  Canadian  and  American  markets. 
Its  effects  as  between  competing  individuals  are  the  same 
as  between  competing  countries.  A  discriminating  in- 
come tax  is  a  tax  in  favor  of  some  men  as  against  others. 
It  puts  some  merchants  and  some  manufacturers  at  a  dis- 
advantage in  competition  with  others. 

"  It  is  not,  then,  merely  that  an  income  tax  is  unequal 
in  its  operations,  but  that  the  operations  are  destructive 
of  wealth.  When  we  exempt  small  incomes,  and  tax 
larger  ones,  what  in  effect  are  we  doing  but  taxing  the 
larger  abilities  in  favor  of  the  smaller  ?  Not  that  this  is 
true  in  all  cases,  since  large  incomes  are  often  the  result 
not  of  superior  abilities,  but  of  monopolies  secured  to 
the  possessor  by  legislation.  But  it  is  generally  true, 
nevertheless,  that  higher  incomes  denote  higher  manual 
or  commercial  intelligence.  This  income,  these  wages, 
are  the  payment  by  society  of  the  higher  order  and  value 
of  service.  Society  pays  it  because  the  service  is  worth 
it.  For  society  to  turn  and  take  part  of  it  back  is  to  de- 
clare itself  a  foolish  paymaster,  or  to  assume  tacitly  that 
the  income  is  due  to  the  possession  of  special  privileges 


TAXING  HONESTY  AND    THRIFT.  131 

which  society  has  unjustly  created.  In  either  case  the 
process  discredits  the  system. 

"  Is  there  any  escape  from  this  conclusion  ?  Does  not, 
in  fact,  the  advocacy  of  an  income  tax  in  itself  contain 
the  admission  of  the  injustice  of  social  conditions  which 
secure  to  the  receivers  such  incomes  ?  If  not,  why  is  it 
just  to  tax  incomes  ?  A  proportional  income  tax  is  a 
robbery  of  the  rich  for  the  benefit  of  the  poor — that  is, 
it  is  theoretically  such.  Practically  it  would  not  be.  For 
the  history  of  taxation  abundantly  reveals  that  all  sys- 
tems leveled  against  wealth  return  against  poverty. 

"  Almost  every  country  imposes  income  taxes.  But 
these  vary  and  have  varied  with  time  and  place.  A 
graduated  income  tax — that  is,  a  tax  increasing  pro 
rata  to  income — which  is  of  the  kind  most  likely  to 
recommend  itself  to  the  Farmers'  Alliance — was  first 
proposed  by  Say  and  the  French  economists.  But 
nothing  is  more  conclusively  demonstrated  than  its 
failure  in  practice.  It  took  England  just  twelve  months 
to  get  rid  of  it,  the  graduated  feature  of  the  tax  being 
adopted  in  1798  under  Pitt,  and  abolished  in  1799.  And 
this  occurred  in  a  time  of  war,  when  all  kinds  of  taxa- 
tion are  imposed  and  continued,  regardless  of  effects  or 
of  the  difficulties  of  assessment  and  collection. 

"  Germany  has  long  levied  an  income  tax.  Professor 
Goldwin  Smith  says,  '  there  is  no  complaint  in  regard 
to  it.'  Austria  imposes  an  income  tax  on  almost  all 
incomes,  classified  at  different  rates  according  to  the 


132 


WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 


sources  whence  they  are  derived,  with  the  exaction  of 
three  times  the  amount  of  the  tax  as  a  penalty  for 
making  false  returns.  Italy  imposes  an  income  tax,  but 
as  the  fiscal  administration  of  Italy  is  not  conducted  on 
any  recognized  principles,  and  the  tax  is  only  one  among 
a  thousand  for  extracting  the  lire — from  one  on  show- 
cases and  awnings,  to  others  on  decrees  of  separation 
between  husbands  and  wives,  and  permits  for  exhuming 
the  dead — it  occupies  an  unimportant  place.  Land,  how- 
ever, pays  no  taxes,  incomes  derivable  from  this  source 
being  exempt ;  but  Italy's  marvelous  diversity  of  penal- 
ties upon  the  making  and  doing  of  things — together  with 
a  tariff  as  extraordinary  as  our  own — is  as  notable  as  the 
national  poverty  and  degradation. 

"  Unfortunately,  little  can  be  gathered  as  to  the  opera- 
tion of  the  tax  in  those  countries  in  which  *  there  is  no 
complaint/  It  is  only  under  representative  governments 
that  the  systems  of  taxation  in  vogue  become  objects  of 
complaint  or  criticism.  It  is  to  England  we  must  turn  if 
we  would  learn  something  of  the  mode  of  taxation  we 
are  considering.  Even  here  the  data  are  meagre  and  un- 
satisfactory. 

"  In  England  the  income  tax  yields  a  large  revenue ; 
yet  the  organized  opposition  to  it  is  strong  and  active. 
Such  opposition  is  based  rather  upon  the  necessarily 
inquisitorial  mode  of  its  assessment  and  collection  than 
upon  the  broader  considerations  which  condemn  it.  And 
the  objections  are  strong  against  a  system  which  calls  for 


TAXING  HONESTY  AND   THRIFT.  13$ 

the  merchant's  and  broker's  ledger  and  private  accounts, 
the  amount  of  profit  on  sales,  and  the  sums  of  borrowed 
capital,  as  the  price  of  exemption  from  excessive  over- 
charge. And  when  these  business  secrets  are  laid  before 
surveyor  and  commissioners  who  are  fellow-townsmen — 
perhaps  actual  rivals  in  business — the  embarrassing  na- 
ture of  such  investigation  can  better  be  imagined  than 
described.1 

"  Mill  contends  in  his  Political  Economy  that  the  in- 
come tax  has  such  objections  in  practice  that  it  should 
be  reserved  only  for  special  emergencies.  But  the  in- 
justice of  the  income  tax  has  usually  been  aggravated  by 
the  fact  of  its  being  a  temporary  measure,  and  by  reason 
of  its  constant  modifications  disastrous  in  effect,  falling 
upon  incomes  which  cease  with  the  expiration  of  the 
tax,  to  the  exemption  of  the  future  and  larger  incomes 
from  investments  in  process  of  maturing  during  its  con- 
tinuance. 

u  Historically,  however,  Mill's  dictum  is  justified  ;  for 
the  income  tax  has  never  occupied  any  other  than  a  sub- 
ordinate place  in  the  taxes  of  any  country.  '  In  France 
the  attempt  to  introduce  it  utterly  failed,'  says  Goldwin 
Smith ;  and  in  India  it  was  so  unpopular  that  it  had  to 
be  abolished.  In  England  it  has  been  continued,  but 
always  under  protest,  and  with  apologetic  explanations 
from  every  successive  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer. 

1  See  Smith's  Wealth  of  Nations,  Black  &  Tait's  edition,  1846,  p.  884. 

(ED.) 


134  WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

"  Beginning  with  the  imposition  of  an  income  tax  of 
four  shillings  in  the  pound,  in  1689,  by  the  English  gov- 
ernment, which  is  said  to  have  borrowed  it  from  Holland, 
where  it  had  long  been  known  to  Alva  and  the  Spanish 
plunderers  and  tax-gatherers  who  preyed  upon  the  people 
of  the  Netherlands,  this  particular  mode  of  taxation  has 
been  subject  to  such  alteration,  modification,  and  attack 
as  to  reveal  its  essentially  unstable  character.  Precisely 
as  a  tariff  tax,  upon  which  there  is  no  practical  agreement 
among  either  revenue-tariff  men  or  the  schools  of  ultra- 
protectionists,  the  kind  and  degree  of  an  income  tax 
among  those  who  uphold  it  as  a  tax  to  be  recommended 
in  itself  has  been  shuttlecock  for  every  battledore.  But, 
historically,  it  has  been  either  a  war  measure  or  an  alter- 
native. 

"The  income  tax  was  imposed  by  England  in  1797  to 
defray  the  expenses  of  the  war  with  France.  It  was  re- 
imposed  after  the  renewal  of  hostilities  following  the  con- 
clusion of  the  Peace  of  Amiens  in  1803,  and  concluded  at 
the  final  peace  in  1816.  It  was  distinctively  a  war 
measure. 

"It  was  imposed  again  in  1842  by  Sir  Robert  Peel,  to 
meet  the  deficit  anticipated  from  the  reduction  of  duties 
upon  imported  wheat  and  cereals.  It  was  this  time 
imposed  as  an  alternative,  and  not  as  a  tax  possessing  in 
itself  any  advantage. 

"  The  income  tax  in  England  has  been  subject,  as  I 
have  said,  to  constant  modification  and  attack ;  but  the 


TAXING  HONESTY  AND    THRIFT.  135 

more  radical  readjustments  which  have  been  proposed 
have  been  unheeded.  Gladstone,  in  1874,  offered  to  re- 
peal it  altogether;  and  he  must  have  accurately  estimated 
the  feeling  in  regard  to  it,  for  with  the  change  of  govern- 
ment in  that  year,  under  Sir  Stafford  Northcote,  it  was 
reduced  to  the  lowest  figure  since  its  imposition  in  1842  ; 
and  exemptions  were  extended  to  incomes  of  one  hundred 
and  fifty  pounds,  which  was  fifty  pounds  greater  than 
under  the  old  law. 

"  It  has  been  repeatedly  proposed  to  exempt  what  have 
been  called  'precarious  incomes/  by  those  who  have 
realized  the  injustice  and  impolicy  of  taxing  all  incomes 
— even  so-called  industrial  incomes — equally,  without 
reference  to  the  source  from  which  they  are  derived. 
But  for  practical  consideration,  as  subjects  of  legislation, 
stable  and  precarious  incomes  would  cease  to  be  matter 
of  distinction.  Some  incomes  are  more  precarious  than 
others,  but  under  such  a  law  they  would  multiply  rapidly 
in  the  tax  returns,  and  stable  incomes  would  grow  ex- 
ceedingly scarce.  It  is  to  be  hoped  that  in  any  income 
tax  which  may  replace  the  tariff  tax  in  the  United  States 
all  incomes  arising  from  earnings  will  be  exempt.  This 
will  mean  the  placing  of  a  provision  in  the  system  which, 
cutting  off  the  principal  source  of  revenue  supply,  will 
contain  the  seeds  of  its  own  abolition. 

"  The  Commissioners  for  Her  Majesty's  Inland  Reve- 
nue (28th  Report),  in  reply  to  the  objection  against  a  tax 
which  does  not  discriminate  between  incomes  arising  from 


136  WHO  PAYS  YOUR   TAXES? 

investments  and  those  derivable  from  labor,  says  that 
'  realizable/  or  stable,  incomes  are  charged  with  other 
burdens  besides  the  income  tax.  But  it  would  be  ex- 
tremely difficult  for  them  to  prove  that  the  incomes 
earned  by  labor  are  not  always  charged  with  other  bur- 
dens. Her  Majesty's  Commissioners  do  not  undertake 
to  prove  this,  and  the  opportunity  of  being  enlightened 
from  so  high  a  source  is  denied  us.  The  contention, 
therefore,  that  the  income  tax  is  unjust  because  levied 
without  discrimination  upon  the  earnings  of  brain  and 
muscle,  equally  with  the  profits  of  investments,  must  be 
allowed  to  remain  as  part  of  the  indictment  against  this 
method  of  raising  revenue. 

"  Gladstone  has  been  the  unsparing  critic  of,  and  dex- 
trous apologist  for,  the  income  tax.  That  it  is  a  tax,  the 
retention  of  which  serves  a  good  purpose  as  a  deterrent 
to  war,  which  the  creation  of  bonded  debt  encourages,  is 
one  of  the  recommendations  urged  for  it  by  the  English 
statesman.  But  this  is  true  of  many  other  taxes,  though 
probably  not  true  of  a  tariff  tax,  the  beneficiaries  of  which 
would,  no  doubt,  eagerly  arm  themselves  to  preserve;  but 
it  is  not  a  good  reason  for  retaining  an  income  tax  in 
preference  to  all  other  modes  of  '  paying  as  you  go.' 

"  The  income  tax,  at  all  events,  is  not  a  sneaking  and 
surreptitious  tax,  like  some  others.  But  it  is  almost 
equally  demoralizing.  At  the  very  time  of  its  introduc- 
tion into  England,  Sir  Robert  Peel  stigmatized  it  as  ob- 
noxious and  inquisitorial,  and  a  tax  which  ought  to  be 


TAXING  HONESTY  AND    THRIFT.  137 

reserved  for  war.  Its  operations  in  England  amply  justify 
what  J.  R.  McCulloch  says  of  it — that  it  is  'a  tax  on 
honesty,  and  a  bounty  on,  and  an  incentive  to,  perjury 
and  fraud.' 

"  The  ingenuity  of  man  has  been  at  infinite  pains  to 
improve  the  parts  of  an  intricate  machinery  of  taxation 
unsound  in  the  principles  of  its  construction.  The  mode 
of  assessing  and  collecting  the  tax  is  in  itself  no  ordinary 
mode  of  machinery  for  fiscal  purposes ;  and  for  guarding 
against  failure  or  fraud  the  experience  of  nearly  fifty  years 
has  given  England  a  system  which  extorts  admiration, 
but  under  which,  nevertheless,  failure  and  fraud  continue. 
One  of  the  reports  of  the  Inland  Commissioners  says: 
'  The  claims  to  compensation  which  have  arisen  out  of  a 
recent  extensive  demolition  of  houses  in  a  certain  district 
by  the  Metropolitan  Board  of  Works  have  given  the 
usual  evidence  of  the  frauds  which  prevail  under  Schedule 
D.' — i.e.,  the  schedule  under  which  industrial  incomes  are 
taxed  on  a  basis  of  self-assessment.  These  local  com- 
pensation claims  seldom  fail  to  reveal  the  existence  of 
wholesale  frauds  in  the  tax  returns. 

"  Its  inequality  is  clear.  The  variations  in  the  schedule 
from  year  to  year  are  an  indication  of  this.  *  It  is  evi- 
dent, that,  as  far  as  the  principle  of  taxing  all  incomes 
equally  (irrespective  of  the  source  from  which  they  are 
derived)  is  concerned,  the  tax  is  practically  a  failure/ 
says  John  Noble,  in  his  work,  '  The  Queen's  Taxes.' 

"  An  income  tax  is  certain  to  exempt  wealth.     Glad- 


I38  WHO  PAYS    YOUR    TAXES? 

stone  has  repeatedly  declared  that  on  the  lower  class  of 
incomes  the  tax  is  fully  and  accurately  levied ;  and,  as  an 
English  writer  says,  '  it  is  overwhelmingly  energetic  in 
minutiae.'  When  the  United  States  exempted  incomes 
below  $1,000,  it  was  discovered  that  only  259,385  persons 
in  a  population  of  40,000,000  were  in  receipt  of  in- 
comes in  excess  of  that  amount;  when  exemptions  were 
raised  to  $2,000,  the  number  of  persons  who  paid  the  tax 
was  reduced  to  116,000,  and  subsequently  fell  to  71,000. 
(Lalor's  '  Cyclopedia  of  Political  Economy.') 

"  In  whatever  way  the  income  tax  is  assessed,  inequal- 
ity must  result.  To  assess  by  arbitrary  estimate  is  taxa- 
tion by  blackmail ;  to  base  assessment  on  returns  of  the 
payer  is  to  leave  the  truth-teller  helpless  and  at  the 
mercy  of  the  liar.  It  is  either  taxation  by  guesswork  or 
taxation  by  spies. 

"  It  was  at  the  conclusion  of  the  Crimean  war  that  the 
income  tax,  increased  to  pay  the  expenses  of  the  war, 
aroused  the  hostility  of  the  commercial  classes  of  Eng- 
land. We  can  understand  this  if  we  bear  in  mind  the 
words  of  a  well-known  English  economic  writer,  R.  Dud- 
ley Baxter  (*  Taxation  of  the  United  Kingdom ') :  '  Too 
large  an  assessment  is  often  made  to  keep  up  appear- 
ances;'or  the  comment  of  Lorin  A.  Lathrop,  formerly 
United  States  consul  to  Bristol :  '  Many  men  in  the 
business  are  said  to  overpay  rather  than  appeal.' 

"  It  will  appear  from  this  that  the  income  tax  fails 
practically  to  meet  the  recommendations  accorded  to  it 


TAXING  HONESTY  AND    THRIFT. 

in  theory,  as  most  nearly  approximating  to  Adam  Smith's 
maxim,  that  '  the  subjects  of  every  state  ought  to  pay 
to  the  support  of  government  as  nearly  as  possible  in 
proportion  to  the  revenue  which  they  respectively  enjoy 
under  the  protection  of  the  state.' 

"In  1860  the  Liverpool  Financial  Reform  Association 
proposed  in  lieu  of  the  income  tax  what  they  call  a 
'  wealth  tax.'  Just  how  they  proposed  to  levy  and  col- 
lect this  I  do  not  know.  But  it  is  this  same  association 
which  to-day  is  favorably  inclining  to  a  ground-rent  tax 
in  lieu  of  all  other  taxes ;  and  whatever  view  we  may 
take  of  the  real  or  assumed  defects  of  such  a  tax,  it 
argues  a  tendency  to  simplify  the  theory  and  application 
of  taxation,  and  to  reduce  to  a  definite  and  general  prin- 
ciple the  confusion  of  present  methods. 

"  Now  another,  though  perhaps  smaller,  question  arises. 
An  income  tax  is  popularly  supposed  not  to  distribute 
itself.  It  is  one  of  the  few  taxes  which,  like  the  land- 
value  tax,  do  not  increase  prices.  It  is,  therefore,  one 
of  those  methods  of  revenue  raising  which  is  called  a 
direct  tax.  Economists  are  in  general  accord  as  to  the 
truth  of  this.  They  agree  that  income  taxes  are  not  paid 
in  increased  cost  upon  articles  consumed.  This  is  true. 

"  But  is  it  true  that  an  income  tax  cannot  be  shifted  ? 
Leaving  out  of  consideration  the  fact  that  fines  upon 
industry — i.  e.,  all  taxes  to  which  an  income  tax  is  not 
exceptional — must  reduce  wealth  by  limiting  enterprise, 
and  is  therefore,  in  its  ultimate  effects,  the  same  as 


140 


WHO  PAYS  YOUR   TAXES? 


increase  of  price,  which  reduces  opportunity  and  lessens 
supply,  let  us  inquire  if  an  income  tax  may  not  be  shifted 
by  an  employer  upon  labor. 

"  The  reply  will  of  course  be  that  it  cannot,  as  the  wages 
of  labor  are  fixed  by  the  market  rate,  and  that  an  em- 
ployer of  labor  will  lose  his   employees   the   instant   he 
attempts  to  reduce  their  wages  below  the  market  rate. 
He  cannot,  therefore,  make  his  labor  pay  his  income  tax. 
Now,  this  is  true  of  all  occupations  in  which  the  rate  of 
wages  is  determined  by  the  quantity  and  quality  of  work, 
and  in  which  the  number  of  men  engaged  is  sufficient  to 
establish  a  general  average  of  efficiency,  and  to  make  a 
more  or  less  fixed  remuneration  per  unit  of  work  per- 
formed.    In   these  trades  there  is  a  standard   of  wages 
which  an  income  tax  would  not  injure.     It  is  true  of  all 
mechanical  trades,  of  the  generality  of  clerks  and  sales- 
men, and  of  some  classes  of  professional  men.     But  it 
seems  to  me  to  be  not  true  of  all  unfixed  occupations, 
such    as   private   secretaries,  housekeepers,   governesses, 
clergymen,  private  tutors,  etc.,  etc.     What,  for  example, 
is  the  market  rate  of  wages  for  private  secretaries  ?   Their 
wages  are  governed   not  so   much  by  average  efficiency, 
as  by  the  ability  of  the  employer  to  pay.    An  income  tax 
would  lessen  this  ability. 

"  Let  us  not  leave  the  argument  here,  but  press  it  home. 
A  natural  objection  will  be  that  if  private  secretaries' 
wages  could  be  reduced,  they  would  be  reduced  now,  and 
the  employer  would  not  wait  for  an  income  tax  to  reduce 


TAXING  HONESTY  AND    THRIFT. 


141 


them.  This  is  a  fair  and  reasonable  objection,  and  looks 
plausible.  But  let  us  suppose  the  case.  You  are  an 
employer  of  labor,  and  your  income  is  next  year  subject 
to  a  tax.  Your  first  effort  will  be  to  make  up  that  tax 
in  whatsoever  way  you  can,  in  reduction  of  wages  wher- 
ever you  may.  This  is  entirely  natural,  and  is  an  evi- 
dence not  so  much  of  the  hardness  of  man's  heart,  as  of 
the  impolicy  and  injustice  of  such  taxation.  No  man  but 
feels  dimly  conscious  that  every  tax  of  this  kind  is  an 
assault  upon  his  property  rights,  as  it  unquestionably  is. 
He  shakes  it  off  with  perfect  ease  in  most  cases,  and 
always  with  entire  freedom  of  conscience. 

"  The  class  of  men  who  at  the  last  would  pay  the  income 
tax  will  be  the  class  that  employ  private  secretaries,  and 
similar  specialized  labor,  the  wages  of  which  are  variously 
determined  by  exceptional  ability,  personal  attachments, 
or  accidental  causes,  rather  than  by  competition.  An 
income  tax  would  reach  this  class  by  inducing  employers 
to  reduce  their  wages.  It  would  reach  them  not  as  indi- 
viduals only,  but  as  a  class,  and  tend  to  lower  their  wages 
to  a  fixed  maximum.  And  while  the  wages  of  men  en- 
gaged in  such  occupations  would  fall,  it  would  not  clearly 
appear  that  it  was  they  and  not  the  employers  who  were 
paying  the  income  tax.  It  ought  not  to  be  forgotten  that 
much  of  the  missing  wealth  of  the  poor  is  to  be  sought 
for  in  the  attempts  to  reach  the  rich  by  taxing  them. 

"  The  retrenchment  of  expenses  which  the  income  tax 
would  make  desirable  to  all,  and  necessary  to  many  who 


I42  WHO  PA  YS  YOUR  TAXES? 

would  pay  it,  would  act  in  this  way :  The  wealthy  man 
would  make  his  first  retrenchment  in  club  expenses,  and 
the  wages  of  waiters  and  attendants  at  these  resorts 
would  fall;  in  his  yachting  expenses,  which  would  reduce 
the  wages  of  captain  and  crew  ;  in  his  kitchen,  which 
would  reduce  the  chef,  for  while  Vanderbilt  with  his 
princely  income  could  still  continue  to  pay  for  such  ser- 
vices the  sum  he  is  said  to  pay  to  one  individual — ten 
thousand  dollars  a  year — the  men  of  smaller  incomes, 
striving  to  maintain  their  position  in  the  fashionable 
world,  would  reduce  the  wages  to  the  class  of  employees 
who  receive  compensations  solely  determined  by  the 
vanity  of  social  considerations.  Much  of  the  income 
tax,  though  by  no  means  all  of  it,  would  be  shifted  upon 
the  shoulders  of  these  relatively  highly  paid  but  deserving 
classes  of  laborers.  I  do  not  wish  to  exaggerate  the  im- 
portance of  what  I  regard  as  the  inevitable  shifting  of  a 
portion  of  this  tax,  and  I  urge  it  merely  in  refutation  of 
the  belief  generally  entertained  that  it  cannot  be  shifted. 
"  We  have  seen  how  in  England  the  income  tax  sup- 
plied the  place  of  a  protective  tariff.  It  seems  ungrate- 
ful to  quarrel  with  a  tax  which  has  served  such  a  good 
purpose  in  the  past  and  may  serve  the  same  good  purpose 
again.  All  the  disadvantages,  moral  and  material,  which 
pertain  to  such  a  tax  might  be  undergone  to  put  a  stop 
to  the  practice  of  legislators  who  present  sophistical 
pleas  in  behalf  of  American  labor,  as  an  incident  of  rec- 
reation from  the  more  serious  business  of  incorporating 


TAXING  HONESTY  AND    THRIFT.  143 

into  the  laws  of  taxation  acts  of  national  larceny.  All 
the  disadvantages  of  such  a  tax  are  small  in  comparison 
to  the  unavoidable  eleemosynary  incidence  of  even  a 
revenue  tariff.  And  if  this  tax  is  to  serve,  as  now  seems 
probable,  as  a  battering-ram  to  beat  down  the  gates 
where  the  steel-rail  lords,  the  coal  barons,  the  jute-bag- 
gers, and  all  the  other  chevaliers  cT Industrie  levy  toll  upon 
every  toiler  in  shop  and  factory,  upon  every  Western 
farmer  in  his  wheat-field,  upon  every  black  son  of  the 
South  in  the  cotton  lands  beneath  the  broiling  heat — 
then  to  quarrel  over  weapons  seems  an  almost  criminal 
folly. 

"  It  will  be  remembered  how,  in  the  Presidential  cam- 
paign of  1876,  the  mad  political  processions,  with  the 
banners  and  torchlights  which  make  democracies  ridicu- 
lous, kept  step  to  the  cry,  so  well  attuned  to  marching 
feet,  *  Sammy,  pay  your  income  tax/  And  the  great 
public  would  never  have  known- — nor,  indeed,  have 
greatly  cared — whether  Mr.  Tilden  had  paid  it  or  not,  if 
the  charge  had  not  been  brought  against  him  by  officers 
of  the  Government  for  the  purpose  of  injuring  his  candi- 
dacy. And  even  had  he  made  his  returns  with  the  most 
scrupulous  fidelity  to  truth,  the  charge  might  still  have 
been  yelled  by  noisy  throats  in  political  parades  as  a 
catching  campaign  cry.  It  is  no  minor  argument  against 
the  income  tax — against  all  taxes  the  returns  of  which 
are  not  readily  verifiable — that  they  admit  of  just  such 
charges  in  times  of  political  excitement,  and  for  partisan 


WHO  PAYS   YOUR   TAXES? 

purposes  urge  men  to  magnify  the  evils  of  tax  evasion  in 
the  individual,  which  is  a  common  practice  among  the 
many. 

"To  persons  of  a  deficient  comprehension  of  public 
morality,  the  income  tax  seems  a  justifiable  method  ot 
getting  something  out  of  the  rich  man's  coffers.  To 
persons  who  take  predatory  views  of  taxation,  the  ques- 
tion as  to  what  right  the  public  has  with  the  rich  man's 
wealth  will  seem  like  the  query  of  an  idiot.  And  yet,  if 
there  is  such  a  thing  as  national  or  public  morality,  it  is 
an  extremely  pertinent  question. 

"  The  idea  seems  to  be  almost  universally  shared,  that 
an  income  tax  is  a  just  tax  because  levied  only  upon 
those  able  to  pay  it.  This  is  no  proof  at  all  of  its  justice, 
any  more  than  Dick  Turpin's  practice  of  taking  from 
the  rich  to  give  to  the  poor  is  an  adequate  defense  of 
Turpin's  profession.  Its  advocates  may  talk  of  its  jus- 
tice, but  the  advocacy  is  full  of  a  greedy  snarl.  *  What 
tax/  says  the  New  York  World,  *  is  at  once  so  just  and  so 
likely  to  commend  itself  to  the  Farmers'  Alliance  and  the 
other  fresh  forces  in  politics,  as  a  tax  upon  the  large 
incomes  of  the  rich  ?  ' 

"  The  justification  most  frequently  urged  for  an  income 
tax  is,  it  seems  to  me,  its  fullest  condemnation.  Taxa- 
tion has  its  ethics  ;  how  can  it  be  right  for  the  public  to 
take  from  a  man  merely  because  he  is  rich  ?  Are  riches 
a  crime  ?  Are  rich  men,  per  se,  a  danger  to  the  commu- 
nity ?  That  there  are  men  richer  than  they  ought  to  be, 


TAXING  HONESTY  AND    THRIFT.  \^ 

is  true ;  that  great  riches,  united  with  great  poverty, 
menace  civilization,  is  true ;  that  the  constitution  of  so- 
ciety is  such,  that  taxation  is  such,  as  to  unjustly  swell 
the  incomes  of  the  rich,  is  also  true  ;  but  is  an  income  tax 
therefore  a  just  tax?  Think  a  moment.  There  are  men 
of  large  incomes  who  earn  them.  Howe,  McCormack, 
Goodyear,  Edison,  are  men  who  returned  to  society  every 
penny  they  received  a  hundred-fold.  To  deprive  them  of 
any  portion  of  their  income  is  not  only  unjust,  but  im- 
politic. We  want  more  Howes,  Goodyears,  Edisons, 
McCormacks;  and  their  fortunes  can  scarcely  be  too 
large.  Society  should  hold  out  every  inducement  to 
searchers  for  the  secrets  of  nature,  who  harness  the  ele- 
mental and  mechanical  forces  to  do  man's  bidding,  who 
prepare  the  way  for  the  time  when  mankind,  raised  in- 
finitely higher,  and  resting  from  merely  physical  labor, 
shall  devote  the  godlike  powers  of  mind  to  the  solution 
of  the  deeper  problems  of  their  spiritual  being. 

"  A  tax  on  incomes?  The  income  of  the  coupon  cutter 
and  the  inventor  !  The  income  of  the  Astors,  whose 
land  earns  money  while  they  sleep,  and  the  income  of 
the  man  whose  genius  shall  reduce  the  cost  of  making 
aluminum,  thereby  revolutionizing  a  thousand  processes 
of  manufacture !  The  income  of  the  man  whose  capital 
earns  his  money,  and  the  income  of  the  man  whose  brain 
earns  it !  The  income  of  Carnegie  and  of  Dr.  Shrady  ! 
Of  Mr.  Gould,  and  Bell  of  telephone  fame  !  Lump  all 

these  results  of  exceptional  abilities  and  legislative  mo- 
10 


WHO   PAYS  YOUR    TAXES? 

nopolies  together,   call   them   incomes,  and  then   swoop 
down  upon  them  with  a  tax  ! 

"  The  objections  against  an  income  tax  may  be  thus 
summed  up : 

"In  its  theory  (as  a  mode  of  encouraging  a  more  equit 
able  distribution  of  wealth),  fallacious. 

"  In  its  discrimination,  unjust  and  impolitic. 

"  In  its  operation,  unequal. 

"  In  its  practice,  inquisitorial  and  corruptive. 

"  The  reasons  which  appear  to  justify  an  income  tax  arise 
from  a  superficial  analysis  of  the  social  problem — from 
that  superficiality  which  concerns  itself  with  the  flower- 
ing effects  rather  than  with  the  causes  at  the  root.  This 
superficiality  it  is  which  urges  governors  and  legislators, 
who  have  not  the  inclination  nor  indeed  the  leisure  for 
the  study  of  these  problems,  to  seek  a  remedy  for  the 
inequalities  in  taxation  in  more  rigorous  measures  of 
assessment  and  collection,  with  a  vain  hope  of  doing, 
under  a  republican  form  of  government,  with  only  the 
power  of  civil  courts,  what  Rome  with  her  tremendous 
military  organization,  with  rack  and  thumb-screw,  and 
England,  under  King  John,  with  her  inquisitorial  surveil- 
lance and  bodily  persecution  of  the  rich  Jews  of  the 
kingdom,  signally  failed  to  accomplish. 

"The  problems  now  crowding  in  upon  the  republic  are 
not  to  be  solved  through  any  additions  to  or  changes  in 
the  restrictive  measures  by  which  the  nation  has  so  long 
cramped  and  curbed  its  energies,  taking  an  eagle  for  its 


TAXING  HONESTY  AND    THRIFT. 


147 


symbol  and  moping  like  a  snail,  singing  of  liberty  and 
binding  itself  with  tariffs,  claiming  to  be  a  refuge  in  which 
all  are  equal  before  the  law,  yet  giving  out  manufactur- 
ing and  trade  monopolies  to  eager  and  greedy  almoners 
more  lavishly  than  even  good  Queen  Bess  had  dared. 

"  The  republic  has  come  to  the  parting  of  the  ways.  As 
it  turns  from  the  darkness  of  tariff  laws,  let  it  set  its  face 
fairly  and  fully  toward  that  liberty  in  which  no  man's 
earnings  shall  be  subtracted  from,  and  all  the  natural  and 
helpful  activities  of  society  be  left  to  do  their  perfect 
work,  free  from  governmental  interference,  which  shackles 
the  strong  arm  of  labor,  burdens  trade  and  commerce, 
destroys  individual  integrity,  and  alone  prevents  the 
republic  from  taking  the  position  among  the  nations  of 
the  earth  to  which  her  natural  advantages  so  justly  en- 
title her." 


CHAPTER   IX. 

A    WORD    TO    WOMEN. 

"The  women  did  it." — They  can  do  it  again. — Women  peculiarly  the  vic- 
tims of  the  assessor  and  tax-gatherer. — The  rich  suffer  less  than  the 
poor. — Women's  property  for  the  most  part  easily  traceable. — Evils  of 
indirect  taxation. — A  few  easy  questions  for  women. 

"THE  women  did  it." 

Such  is  said  to  be  the  explanation  of  the  rout  of  pro- 
tectionism at  the  State  elections  in  1890,  given  by  the 
ablest  statesman  of  the  defeated  party.  Yes:  the  women 
did  it ;  and  they  can  do  it  again,  if  they  wish  to  do  so. 
The  most  crushing  defeat  ever  suffered  by  any  party  in 
power  in  the  history  of  the  country  was  mainly  due  to 
the  influence  of  women  who  had  no  votes,  and  most  of 
whom  did  not  want  any.  A  new  tariff  was  suddenly  laid 
in  such  manner  that  the  women  could  understand  it. 
It  had  been  done  again  and  again,  but  in  such  a  way  that 
not  one  woman  in  a  thousand  could  see  it.  At  last  it  was 
done  in  open  day;  the  women  saw  it,  and  they  revolted 
against  it.  The  party  in  power  was  defeated  by  a  major- 
ity of  more  than  one  million  votes. 

Whether  this  was  rightly  or  wrongly  done,  is  not  ma- 
terial to  our  present  purpose.  The  point  is,  that,  right 


A    WORD    TO    WOMEN.  149 

or  wrong,  what  women  did  against  the  tariff  they  can  do 
against  any  form  of  bad  taxation,  if  they  will.  Whether 
they  ought  to  have  votes  or  not,  need  not  now  be  dis- 
cussed. When  they  are  practically  unanimous,  their  in 
fluence  upon  the  voters  is  irresistible.  Possibly  the  Pro- 
hibition issue  may  be  an  exception,  but  that  is  doubtful. 
It  is  unquestionable  that  the  Prohibition  movement  would 
have  had  no  strength  anywhere,  had  women  generally 
been  indifferent.  But  consider  how  strong  is  the  appetite 
that  Prohibition  seeks  to  destroy,  and  the  marvel  is  that 
women  should  be  able  to  gain  for  it  so  many  votes. 

If,  then,  women  can  be  generally  convinced  that  they 
suffer  from  unjust  taxation,  and  if  their  interest  can  be 
aroused  on  this  entire  subject  as  it  was  aroused  against 
the  McKinley  bill,  great  results  might  well  be  expected 
from  their  influence.  Few  men  have  any  such  personal 
feeling  about  matters  of  taxation  as  they  have  about  their 
own  liberty  to  drink  or  not  to  drink ;  and  there  is  no 
reason  to  fear  that  women  who  feel  strongly  upon  tax 
reform  would  meet  with  anything  like  the  difficulties 
that  are  encountered  by  the  advocates  of  temperance 
laws. 

Have  women  generally,  as  women,  any  special  concern 
with  questions  of  taxation  ?  Does  it  make  no  serious 
difference  to  them  whether  taxes  are  direct  or  indirect, 
whether  personal  property  is  taxed  or  not,  whether  there 
are  a  thousand  taxes  or  only  one?  Let  them  consider 
carefully,  before  they  dismiss  these  as  "  men's  affairs."  If 


l$0  WHO   PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

a  woman  is  fortunate  enough  to  have  any  taxable  prop- 
erty, she  will  quickly  find  that  all  American  tax-gatherers 
pursue  a  woman  with  far  greater  severity  than  they  pur- 
sue a  man.  If  she  holds  her  property  in  her  own  name, 
she  rarely  understands  the  ingenious  devices  by  which 
men  know  how  to  evade  the  assessor.  She  is  far  less 
willing  to  commit  perjury  than  her  male  neighbors  are. 
She  is  often  willing  to  give  herself  the  benefit  of  a  doubt ; 
but  she  is  never  equal  to  the  cool  manipulation  of  the 
Syracuse  millionaire,  who  annually  wrote  on  his  books  a 
gift  of  a  million  dollars  to  his  children  just  before  assess- 
ment day,  and  annually  wrote  it  back  to  himself  as  soon 
as  he  had  u  sworn  off."  Thousands  of  men  are  known  to 
do  such  things,  or  things  equally  severe  upon  the  State's 
taxes  and  their  own  consciences,  if  they  have  any.  But 
no  instance  of  a  woman's  doing  this  has  ever  been  men- 
tioned. No  wonder  that,  in  1870,  two  maiden  ladies  in 
a  New  York  village  paid  more  taxes  on  personal  property 
than  all  the  men  in  a  large  city  near  by.  The  system  of 
local  taxation  which  prevails  all  over  this  enlightened 
country  is  one  that  puts  a  premium  on  perjury  and  fraud, 
and  concentrates  all  its  weight  upon  honesty,  truth,  and 
simplicity.  Are  not  women  certain  to  suffer  heavily 
under  such  a  system  ? 

Moreover,  the  majority  of  women  who  are  classed  as 
rich  do  not  hold  most  of  their  property  in  their  own 
names;  it  is  put  in  the  names  and  care  of  trustees.  Such 
property  is  easily  traced  by  the  assessors,  and  the  con- 


A    WORD   TO   WOMEN.  !$! 

scientiousness  of  trustees  is  something  refreshing  to 
behold.  An  Ohio  assessor  once  expatiated  eloquently 
concerning  the  strict  truthfulness  with  which  a  certain 
large  estate  was  returned  for  taxation ;  but  when  his 
hearer  begged  an  introduction  to  the  conscientious  owner, 
he  explained,  with  a  little  embarrassment,  that  it  was  all 
in  the  hands  of  three  trustees,  who  would  not  gain  a  cent 
by  false  returns.  It  required  no  Daniel  to  understand 
that  they  would  never  strain  their  consciences  and  risk 
their  personal  liberty  by  making  false  returns  for  the  ex- 
clusive benefit  of  the  widow  and  orphans  whose  estate 
they  had  in  charge. 

The  broad  result  is  that  women  who  have  any  taxable 
property,  either  in  their  own  names  or  held  in  trust  for 
them,  pay  at  least  thrice  their  fair  share  of  State,  county, 
and  town  taxes. 

Indirect  taxes,  as  they  are  called,  are  those  which  are 
laid  upon  things  that  the  people  use  and  must  have,  or, 
at  all  events,  will  have,  such  as  food,  drink,  clothing,  fur- 
niture, buildings,  books,  tools,  and  other  comforts  of  life. 
Upon  such  things  the  Federal  Government  imposes 
enormous  taxes,  which  in  many  instances  discriminate 
harshly  against  women.  But  this  subject  is  not  within 
the  range  of  the  present  discussion,  and  we  only  men- 
tion it  to  illustrate  the  wide  extent  to  which  women  are 
affected  by  taxation.  The  whole  system  of  taxation, 
State  and  national,  bears  with  unjust  and  unequal  sever- 
ity upon  women. 


WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

It  is  not  necessary  at  this  time  to  set  forth  just  what 
ought  to  be  done  to  reform  this  state  of  things.  The 
question  now  is  simply  :  Have  women,  as  such,  any  reason 
for  being  interested  in  methods  of  taxation  ?  Shall  they 
who  have  once  shown  their  power  so  signally  fall  back 
again  into  apathy ;  or  shall  they  study  political  economy 
more  deeply,  and  take  their  part  in  its  discussion  more 
actively?  Should  women  see  themselves  plundered  by 
oppressive  tax  laws,  unequally  administered  to  their 
peculiar  injury,  and  yet  remain  silent  and  indifferent  ? 


CHAPTER   X. 

BIRTH   AND   PROGRESS. 

Legislation  attempted  at  the  instance  of  farmers  in  the  New  York  legisla- 
ture of  1890. — War  upon  the  listing  bills. — An  ineffective  committee 
from  the  Chamber  of  Commerce. — County  option  in  taxation  sug- 
gested.— Interest  in  tax  reform  arguments. — Probably  only  a  deadlock 
prevented  the  enactment  of  county  option. — Farmers  hungry  for  infor- 
mation.— Principles  of  the  Tax  Reform  Association. — Its  formation. — 
Signers. — Those  who  refused  to  sign. — Interest  of  the  press. — Sample 
of  the  association's  work. 

IN  the  winter  of  1890  the  determination  of  the  farmers 
to  tax  personal  property  came  to  a  head  and  showed 
itself  in  a  vigorous  effort  to  pass  the  Linson  and  Erwin 
personal  and  listing  tax  bills.  These  bills  were  designed 
to  reach  all  property,  even  though  in  such  a  process  those 
who  paid  taxes  fairly  might  be  ruined,  and  even  though 
the  most  skilful  dodger  might  be  taxed  three  or  four 
times  on  part  of  his  property.  To  oppose  this  bill  various 
committees  were  sent  to  Albany,  but  the  persistence  of 
the  sentiment  was  such  that  it  was  evident  that  nothing 
but  a  substitute  for  this  bill  would  check  the  effort.  The 
Chamber  of  Commerce  and  the  Board  of  Trade  and 
Transportation  proposed  a  commission  to  consider  taxa- 
tion, and  caused  to  be  introduced  a  bill  providing  for  the 


PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

appointment  of  such  a  commission.  This  was  a  way 
"  how  not  to  do  it,"  and  was  really  intended  as  an 
obstructive  measure.  The  writer,  with  others,  believed 
that  the  more  effective  bill  would  be  one  giving  county 
option  in  taxation,  and  went  to  Albany  with  gentlemen 
representing  the  labor  union,  the  Brooklyn  Home  Owners' 
League,  and  some  other  organizations,  to  advocate  such 
a  bill.  We  had  a  most  respectful  hearing  by  the  com- 
mittee on  Taxation  and  Retrenchments,  to  which  it  was 
referred ;  and,  strange  to  say,  were  earnestly  requested, 
when  we  had  finished  our  argument,  further  to  discuss 
the  subject,  which  request  we  complied  with,  after 
listening  to  a  vigorous  speech  from  the  member  for 
Delaware  on  double  taxation,  the  consequence  of  the 
taxation  of  mortgages.  As  the  result,  ours  was  the  first 
tax  bill  reported  favorably  by  the  committee,  and  had  it 
not  been  for  the  deadlock  it  might  possibly  have  been 
passed.1 

1  The  authorities  of  the  State  of  New  York  should  have  nothing  to  say  or 
do  with  the  assessed  values  or  assessment  for  taxes  in  the  different  counties. 

The  time  was  (now  long  since  passed)  when  the  entire  cost  of  carrying 
on  the  State  Government  and  the  payment  of  the  interest  on  the  State  debt 
was  fixed  at  such  rate  per  thousand  dollars  of  assessed  value  as  would  real- 
ize the  entire  cost. 

Now  it  is  different.  Almost  the  entire  amount  necessary  for  carrying  on 
the  State  Government  and  interest  on  the  debt  is  raised  by  State  tax  on  cor- 
porations and  the  like. 

Let  the  State  rely  on  these  resources  for  her  revenue,  and  in  case  any 
great  public  work  is  undertaken,  or  some  exigency  arise  whereby  this  amount 
shall  not  be  sufficient,  then  let  the  State  levy  on  each  county  a  tax  based  on 
the  population  in  that  county  as  shown  by  the  last  census  prior  to  the 
imposition  of  the  tax.  This  would  permit  the  doing  away  with  that  cum- 


BIRTH  AND  PROGRESS.  ^5 

The  earnest  interest  of  the  farmer  representatives 
wakened  the  writer  to  the  fact  that  the  farmers  are  hun- 
gry for  information.  They  feel  that  they  are  cramped 
by  something,  and  are  groping  in  this  direction  and  that 
to  find  a  way  out,  and  are  most  anxious  not  to  make  a 
mistake. 

It  was  necessary  to  organize  in  order,  first,  to  crystallize 
the  sentiment  of  New  York  City,  and,  second,  to  get 
means  to  furnish  information  to  the  farmers.  With  this 
view  the  writer  obtained  the  signatures  of  prominent 
men  to  this  platform  : 

"  i.  The  most  direct  taxation  is  the  best,  because  it 
gives  to  the  real  payers  of  taxes  a  conscious  and  direct 
pecuniary  interest  in  honest  and  economical  govern- 
ment. 

brous  machinery  and  engine  of  injustice  called  the  State  Board  of  Equaliza- 
tion of  Taxes.  There  is  no  reason  why  such  a  board  should  pass  in  review 
the  work  of  sworn  assessors  in  the  different  counties  for  which  they  act. 
The  extent  of  the  work,  rendering  necessary  the  true  values  and  the  assessed 
values  in  each  county,  is  such  that  no  board  of  equalization  can  in  a  twelve- 
month intelligently  do  its  duty.  In  the  past,  the  action  of  this  board  has 
been  such  as  to  occasion  general  complaint  and  jealousies  between  differ- 
ent boards  of  assessors. 

Each  county  should  raise  the  money  necessary  for  its  use  in  the  manner 
best  suited  to  its  own  needs.  And  as  it  alone  will  be  responsible  for  the 
assessment  and  collection  of  its  taxes,  the  work  will  be  done  much  better 
than  when  the  responsibility  is  divided.  Each  county  could  tax  real  estate 
or  personal  property,  or  both,  as  it  might  seem  best.  If  it  should  be 
deemed  to  the  best  interests  of  the  county  to  encourage  the  coming  of 
people  of  wealth  by  the  total  or  partial  abolition  of  the  tax  on  personal 
estate,  that  could  be  done. 

Heretofore  many  of  our  citizens  still  doing  business  in  this  city  have 
taken  up  their  residence  in  the  adjoining  State  of  New  Jersey  to  escape  the 


I56  WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES* 

"  2.  Mortgages  and  capital  engaged  in  production  or 
trade  should  be  exempt  from  taxation,  because  taxes  on 
such  capital  tend  to  drive  it  away,  to  put  a  premium  on 
dishonesty,  and  to  discourage  industry. 

"  3.  Real  estate  should  bear  the  main  burden  of  taxa- 
tion, because  such  taxes  can  be  most  easily,  cheaply,  and 
certainly  collected,  and  because  they  bear  least  heavily 
on  the  farmer  and  the  worker. 

"4.  Our  present  system  of  levying  and  collecting  State 
municipal  taxes  is  extremely  bad,  and  spasmodic  and  un- 
reflecting tinkering  with  it  is  unlikely  to  result  in  sub- 
stantial improvement. 

"  5.  No  legislature  will  venture  to  enact  a  good  system 
of  local  taxation  until  the  people,  especially  the  farmers, 
perceive  the  correct  principles  of  taxation  and  see  the 
folly  of  taxing  personal  property. 

"  Therefore :  We  desire   to   unite   our  efforts,  in  such 


severe  tax  on  personal  property  levied  in  this  State.  The  State  of  Con- 
necticut, requiring  a  listing  or  schedule  of  personal  property,  has  not 
attracted  those  persons,  as  the  taxes  on  personal  property  are  fully  as  onerous 
in  that  State  as  in  the  State  of  New  York.  A  comparison  between  the 
States  of  New  Jersey  and  Connecticut,  within  equal  distances  from  the  city 
of  New  York,  will  show  both  a  greater  population  and  greater  value  per 
acre  in  the  price  of  land  in  the  State  of  New  Jersey  than  in  the  State  of 
Connecticut. 

It  has  been  found  in  the  past  that  a  tax  on  personal  property  could  not 
be  collected  with  uniformity,  or  rather  with  equal  justice  ;  those  desiring 
to  evade  the  tax  being  able  to  do  so  under  the  forms  of  law,  while  a  tax 
on  real  estate  and  corporations  cannot  well  be  evaded.  Corporations  deriv- 
ing special  privileges  from  the  State  are  proper  subjects  for  special  taxa- 
tion.— Extract  from  a  letter  of  MR.  AMOS  R.  ENO. 


&IRTH  AND   PROGRESS. 


ways  as  may  seem  advisable,  to  keep  up  intelligent  dis- 
cussion and  agitation  of  the  subject  of  taxation,  with  a 
view  to  improvement  in  the  system  and  enlightenment 
as  to  the  correct  principles." 

The   following    gentlemen    signed    the   declaration    of 
principles  : 


Hall  J.  How. 

R.  H.  L.  Townsend. 

F.  B.  Thurber. 


Spencer  Aldrich. 
William  Steinway. 
Edwin  J.  Denning. 


Hon.  David  A.  Wells,  Nor-     Auguste  Richard. 


wich,  Conn. 

William  Gordon  Fellows. 
Hon.  Henry  A.  Hurlbut. 
Gen.  C.  T.  Christensen. 
Hon.  Smith  Ely. 
Thomas  G.  Shearman. 
George  R.  Read. 
George  A.  Scott. 
Amos  R.  Eno. 
John  H.  Inman. 


James  Gaunt. 
Hugh  N.  Camp. 
Isaac  M.  Dyckman. 
Samuel  Thorne. 
John  Sinclair. 
Henry  Hentz. 
James  McCreery. 
Henry  E.  Howland. 
R.  R.  Bowker. 


The  Real  Estate  Record  and  Guide \  in  discussing  the 
work  of  the  association,  gave  an  incomplete  list  of  the 
members,  with  interesting  biographical  facts,  as  follows : 
"  David  A.  Wells,  the  celebrated  statistician  and  writer  on 
political  economy ;  George  H.  Scott,  of  Scott  &  Myers, 
real  estate  brokers,  and  formerly  president  of  the  Real 
Estate  Exchange  ;  George  R.  Read,  an  extensive  real 


158  WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

estate  operator,  and  existing  president  of  the  Real  Estate 
Exchange  ;  Spencer  Aldrich,  a  protectionist,  owner  of 
the  Columbia  Building,  one  of  our  largest  office  build- 
ings, and  representing  the  Aldrich  estate,  owners  of  the 
Aldrich  Court ;  F.  B.  Thurber,  of  Thurber,  Whyland  & 
Co.,  who  is  as  closely  identified  with  the  farming  inter- 
ests as  any  merchant  in  New  York;  Henry  A.  Hurlbut, 
a  strong  protectionist,  director  in  the  Equitable  Life, 
and  holder  of  real  estate ;  William  Gordon  Fellows, 
owns  farming  land  at  Schagticoke,  N.  Y. ;  C.  T.  Christen- 
sen,  president  of  the  Brooklyn  Trust  Co. ;  Smith  Ely, 
ex-mayor  of  New  York,  and  a  large  real  estate  investor; 
Amos  R.  Eno,  a  protectionist,  who  owns  the  Fifth 
Avenue  Hotel  and  many  other  large  properties  in  New 
York  ;  Hall  J.  How,  one  of  New  York's  oldest  real  estate 
brokers;  James  McCreery,  the  dry  goods  merchant, 
whose  interests  in  real  estate  are  as  large  as  those  in  his 
business,  if  not  larger  ;  Isaac  M.  Dyckman,  of  Dyckman 
estate,  consisting  largely  of  vacant  property;  William 
Steinway,  piano  manufacturer,  and  owner  of  the  town  of 
Steinway  where  the  works  are  situated  ;  John  Sinclair, 
pork  packer,  and  one  of  the  founders  of  Cedar  Rapids, 
la.,  has  large  landed  interest  there,  and  has  never  had 
a  strike  among  his  workmen ;  Auguste  Richard,  who 
invests  in  Tennessee  timber  and  farm  land,  and  has  a 
magnificent  house  here  ;  Thomas  G.  Shearman,  a  real 
estate  lawyer  and  writer  on  taxation  ;  Hugh  N.  Camp, 
dealer  in  suburban  lands ;  R.  R.  Bowker,  secretary  of  the 


BIRTH  AND  PROGRESS.  159 

Edison  Electric  Lighting  Co. ;  and  John  Claflin,  of  the 
H.  B.  Claflin  Co." 

When  this  list  had  been  secured,  it  would  have  been 
possible  to  add  to  it  thousands  of  influential  names  with 
simply  the  trouble  of  asking. 

The  signatures  were  given  substantially  in  the  order 
above — some  of  them  with  great  hesitancy  and  doubt  as 
to  whether  they  would  have  a  responsible  following ; 
others,  notably  the  first  three,  with  great  promptness  and 
absolute  independence. 

Those  who  declined  to  sign  were : 

Darius  O.  Mills.  Charles  L.  Tiffany. 

Morris  K.  Jesup.  Orlando  B.  Potter. 

Hon.  Seth  Low.  Ex-Secretary    Charles    F. 
Cornelius  Vanderbilt.  Fairchild. 

J.  Coleman  Drayton.  Charles  Siedler. 
Edward  Livingston. 

There  were  a  few  others  who  would  not  sign,  but  who 
helped  by  contribution  or  in  other  ways. 

The  platform  was  published,  and  it  excited  great  atten- 
tion and  comment  from  the  newspapers.  There  were 
hundreds  of  notices,  comments,  and  attacks  on  it  the  next 
day  from  all  parts  of  the  country.  Those  in  New  York 
and  Brooklyn  who  have  dissented  would  not  fill  a  street- 
car. Thenceforward  the  work  of  the  association  has  been 
as  quiet  and  unobtrusive  as  possible,  and  has  relied  almost 
entirely  upon  contributions  from  leading  men,  generally 


l6o  WHO  PAYS   YOUR   TAXES? 

in  moderate  sums  which  do  not  press  too  heavily  on  any 
one,  and  create  a  solid  interest  in  the  bureau. 

The  efforts  of  the  association  are  well  described  in  the 
following  extract : 

"  The  New  York  Tax  Reform  Association  is  engaged 
in  carrying  on  an  active  propaganda  in  behalf  of  its  prin- 
ciples. The  association  desires  to  attract  capital  to  this 
State,  and  to  encourage  its  investment  in  business  enter- 
prises, to  enhance  real  estate  values,  and  to  educate  away 
the  *  listing  '  and  personal  property  tax  bills  which  threaten 
the  prosperity  of  manufacturing,  financial,  and  commercial 
interests.  To  accomplish  this,  it  carries  on  a  discussion 
of  the  question  of  tax  reform  in  the  press  of  this  State. 

"  A  systematic  agitation  on  behalf  of  the  association's 
principles  has  been  commenced  in  this  city.  Represent- 
atives of  the  association  are  making  a  canvass  of  several 
of  the  principal  business  streets  and  securing  signatures 
to  a  petition  to  amend  the  laws  in  accordance  with  its 
platform.  Hardly  any,  even  of  the  smallest  merchants, 
have  declined  to  sign.  The  various  exchanges  and  similar 
business  organizations  are  adopting  resolutions  indorsing 
the  aims  of  the  association. 

"  The  association  reaches  the  legislators,  the  members 
of  the  New  York  State  Grange,  the  State  Farmers' 
League  and  the  Farmers'  Alliance,  the  industrial  unions, 
the  mayors  of  the  cities,  and  the  presidents  of  villages,  by 
personal  interviews,  by  letters,  and  by  speakers.  Arrange- 
ments are  made  whereby  tax-reform  literature  will  be 


BIRTH  AND  PROGRESS.  l6l 

furnished  to  all  papers  desiring  it,  and  a  large  number  of 
papers  in  various  parts  of  the  State  have  expressed  their 
willingness  to  publish  arguments  in  favor  of  the  associa- 
tion platform." — New  York  Times. 

The  work  is  educational  and  preventive,  rather  than 
obstructive ;  when  bad  bills  are  proposed  at  Albany  and 
are  likely  to  pass,  the  only  thing  to  do  for  the  moment 
is  to  send  up  a  committee,  and  by  the  weight  of  opposi- 
tion get  them  killed.  This  has  been  done  with  great  suc- 
cess on  various  occasions,  both  by  the  Dry-goods  Com- 
mittee and  by  the  Board  of  Trade  and  Transportation, 
with  both  of  which  bodies  this  association  is  in  close  com- 
munication and  with  which,  upon  occasion,  it  heartily  co- 
operates. No  better  account  of  how  this  work  is  done, 
when  any  bill  is  to  be  opposed,  can  be  given  than  in  the 
speech  of  Mr.  William  F.  King,  of  Calhoun,  Robbins  & 
Co.,  at  a  complimentary  dinner  given  to  him  at  the  Mer- 
chants' Club  by  the  leading  dry-goods  and  other  mer- 
chants of  this  city.  The  dinner  was  given  May  6,  1891, 
Mr.  Claflin  presiding,  in  recognition  of  Mr.  King's  services 
in  opposing  the  Listing  bill  and  other  like  measures  un- 
consciously aimed  at  the  prosperity  of  New  York.  After 
an  interesting  speech  by  Mr.  W.  L.  Strong,  Mr.  King,  in 
the  course  of  his  response  to  the  toast  of  the  evening, 
said : 

"  Your  committee,  in  whose  work  I  had  the  honor  of 
bearing  a  part,  was  appointed  at  a  meeting  of  the  dry- 
goods  trade,  held  March  19,  for  the  purpose  of  protest- 


ii 


1 62  WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

ing  against  the  so-called  Listing  bill  and  the  Five  per 
Cent.  Interest  bill  then  before  our  legislature,  and  also 
for  the  purpose  of  taking  prompt  action  to  defeat  them, 
as  being  not  only  detrimental  to  our  own  and  the  general 
commercial  and  financial  interests  of  the  city  of  New 
York,  but  equally  hostile  to  the  general  prosperity  of  the 
community  at  large.  During  the  four  weeks  from  March 
19  to  April  15,  we  sent  through  the  mails  122,000  cir- 
culars and  120,000  headings  of  petitions  to  all  parts  of 
the  State,  not  only  to  the  dry-goods  trade  but  to  every 
other  threatened  industry,  and  we  have  had  the  pleasure 
of  receiving  from  almost  all  classes  hearty  responses  ap- 
proving our  course.  Our  first  visit  to  Albany  was  made, 
as  you  well  know,  about  five  weeks  ago.  We  went  with 
a  committee  of  twelve.  We  formulated  our  protest  in  no 
uncertain  terms,  and  presented  it  before  the  proper  legis- 
lative committee  with  a  forcible  statement  of  the  injury 
which  we  believed  would  result  in  case  either  of  these 
bills  should  pass.  From  observation,  your  committee, 
after  consultation,  arrived  at  the  conclusion  that  the  List- 
ing bill,  as  then  presented,  would  not  pass. 

"  While  your  committee  was  in  constant  communica- 
tion with  Albany  after  its  first  visit,  and  was  watching 
every  movement  of  the  legislature,  the  Five  per  Cent. 
Interest  bill  suddenly  assumed  greater  prominence,  and 
passed  the  Assembly  by  a  vote  of  sixty  to  four.  Your 
committee  immediately  took  action.  We  first  telegraphed 
to  Albany,  and  obtained  the  promise  of  a  hearing.  We 


BIRTH  AND  PROGRESS.  163 

then  sent  invitations  to  every  quarter  of  the  State,  urging 
that  delegations  be  dispatched  to  co-operate  with  us. 
The  consequence  was  that  when  we  visited  Albany  the 
second  time  we  had  fifty  delegates  from  this  city,  and 
about  two  hundred  from  the  interior,  making  it  the  larg- 
est and  most  influential  delegation  that  ever  visited  the 
Capitol,  not  only  in  number,  but  what  they  stood  for — 
the  great  financial,  manufacturing,  commercial,  and  agri- 
cultural interests  of  the  entire  State  protesting  unitedly 
against  these  bills." 

Now,  this  is  vigorous  work  and  splendidly  managed,  but 
it  must  be  remembered  that,  as  Mr.  John  N.  Beach  said 
later  in  the  evening,  the  sentiment  responsible  for  such 
bills  still  lives.  Mr.  Beach  said  on  this  head: 

"  But  we  must  remember  that  the  spirit  which  dictated 
these  bills  was  in  the  air,  is  still  in  the  air,  and,  although 
put  down,  like  Banquo's  ghost  will  arise  again,  will  form- 
ulate other  bills,  at  which  we  must  be  prepared  to  hurl 
the  same  prompt,  vigorous,  and  decisive  blows  which  have 
succeeded  now,  or  they  will  find  their  place  upon  our 
statute  books,  and  we  shall  yet  be  living  and  doing  busi- 
ness— at  least  attempting  to  do  business — under  their 
odious,  onerous,  and  dangerous  provisions." 

To  exorcise  this  subject  totally  and  to  get  it  Christian 
burial,  is  the  only  way  in  which  we  can  make  the  State 
habitable  for  capital.  This  is  the  work  of  our  associa- 
tion. 


CHAPTER  XI. 

THE  UNIVERSITIES  AWAKENING. 

Circular  sent  to  colleges. — Answers  from  the  University  of  Virginia, 
Harvard  University,  Johns  Hopkins  University,  University  of  Penn- 
sylvania, Yale  University,  Columbia  College,  Princeton. — Corre- 
spondence with  Professors  Shepard  and  Rogers. — Various  objections 
answered. 

THE  discussion  carried  on  by  the  association  with 
presidents  and  professors  of  colleges  and  universities  all 
over  this  country  contains  nearly  all  possible  objections 
and  the  answers  to  them.  The  association  opened  the 
correspondence  by  sending  to  one  hundred  and  seventy 
institutions  a  short  circular  letter  embodying  the  princi- 
ples of  the  association  and  asking  for  an  expression  of 
opinion  as  to  its  objects.  One  hundred  and  seventy 
responses  to  this  circular  were  received.  Of  these, 
ninety-eight  expressed  views  favorable  to  our  principles, 
thirty  took  issue  with  us,  and  forty-five  were  non- 
committal. In  the  appendix  to  this  volume  will  be 
found  a  list  of  the  presidents  and  professors  from  whom 
answers  have  been  received.  Some  of  the  correspond- 
ence growing  out  of  this  circular  letter  is  herewith 
appended : 


THE    UNIVERSITIES  AWAKENING.  165 

UNIVERSITY  OF  VIRGINIA,   September  23,  1891. 

BOLTON    HALL,    ESQ.,   New  York    Tax    Reform  Association, 

New  York. 

Dear  Sir :  The  fullest  information  accessible  in  regard  to 
direct  taxation,  especially  when  levied  principally  on  land, 
as  with  Henry  George,  would  invite  my  serious  consideration. 
Mr.  David  A.  Wells's  name  at  the  head  of  your  list  of  asso- 
ciates invites  my  favorable  appreciation  of  your  doctrine,  for 
I  have  long  regarded  him  as  the  ablest,  clearest,  and  most 
advanced  economist  of  this  country.  Yet  my  opinions  have 
been  opposed  to  any  single  tax  system.  I  have  deemed  that 
all  lines  were  requisite  to  avoid  the  escape  of  classes  and 
individuals  from  the  burdens  of  the  community,  and  to  render 
the  onus  of  Government  demands  proportionate  to  the  just 
liabilities,  benefits,  and  means  of  all  and  several. 

The  third  and  chief  proposition  of  the  platform  excites  the 
greatest  dubitation  in  my  mind.  It  seems  a  return  in  the 
direction  of  the  French  economists  and  late  innovators.  It 
appears  very  questionable  at  a  time  when,  from  the  enormous 
extension  of  agricultural  occupations,  and  the  competition  of 
the  whole  world  in  agricultural  production,  markets,  and  sales, 
land  is  daily  declining  in  price,  except  in  cities  and  for 
manufacturing  sites  and  mines.  Moreover,  land,  like  labor,  is 
becoming  little  more  than  a  redundant  but  necessary  accompa- 
niment of  machinery  and  other  forms  of  concentrated  capital. 

I  am  anxious,  however,  for  information  from  all  quarters. 
Respectfully, 

GEORGE  F.  HOLMES. 

Prof.  GEORGE  F.  HOLMES,  University  of  Virginia,  Albemarle 
County,  Va. 

My  Dear  Sir  :  Your  letter  prompts  me  to  address  you  fur- 
ther on  the  subject.  Our  proposition  is  not  the  single  tax  of 


l66  W 'HO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

Mr.  George,  but  simply  the  imposition  of  all  taxes  upon  real 
estate,  because  this  would  relieve  capital  engaged  in  produc- 
tion from  the  discouragements  attendant  upon  taxation.  It  is 
true  that  it  would  relieve  some  other  wealth  from  taxation, 
but  we  hold  that  taxation  of  bonds,  stocks,  mortgages,  and 
the  like  is  unnecessary  and  wrong  when  real  estate  is  taxed, 
since  these  things  stand  for  real  estate,  and  consequently  such 
taxation  would  be  double  taxation.  The  argument  against 
taxing  personal  property  is  not  only  that  such  property  in- 
cludes tools  of  trade  and  other  aids  to  production,  but  that 
much  of  such  taxation  would  be  easily  avoidable.  You  seem 
to  fear  that  the  effect  of  a  system  of  taxation,  such  as  we 
propose,  would  be  to  oppress  the  farmer  ;  on  the  contrary,  I 
believe  it  would  relieve  him  from  taxation.  His  tools  of  trade 
would  escape,  and  if  the  assessment  upon  land  were  justly 
made,  as  we  contemplate,  the  effect  would  be  to  place  the  bur- 
den of  taxes  in  great  part  upon  city  and  suburban  lands,  and 
upon  much  land  now  held  for  speculative  purposes.  You 
mention  that  land  is  constantly  declining  in  value,  and  this 
is  undoubtedly  true,  in  part,  of  agricultural  lands  ;  but  city 
and  suburban  lands  are  enormously  increasing  in  value,  and 
the  effect  of  our  proposition  would  be  to  place  the  burdens 
where  they  belong,  and  to  relieve  the  farm  lands  that  have  for 
years  past  been  falling  in  value. 

If  you  wish  to  discuss  this  subject  further,  I  shall  be  glad  to 
hear  from  you  again,  and  to  send  whatever  reply  your  letter 
seems  to  prompt. 

Yours  very  truly, 

BOLTON  HALL, 

Secretary  and  Vice-President. 

ATTICA,  N.  Y.,  October  2,  1891. 
NEW  YORK  TAX  REFORM  ASSOCIATION  : 
You  ask  for  my  opinion  of  your  platform  for  tax  reform, 


THE    UNIVERSITIES  A  WAKENING.  167 

and  I  am  glad  of  the  opportunity  of  giving  it,  as  it  is  a  ques- 
tion of  the  utmost  importance  to  all  interests  in  the  State. 

1.  If  the  reason  you  give  for  direct  taxation  is  a  good  one, 
and  I  believe  it  is,  then  all  property  owners  should  be  taxed  so 
that  all  should  have  a  conscious  and  direct  interest  in  honest 
and  economical  government. 

2.  The  reason  you  give  for  exempting  mortgages  and  capi- 
tal from  taxation  is  specious  rather  than  real.     That  taxation 
of  personal  property  develops  inherent  dishonesty  is  doubtless 
true,  but  how  an  honest  effort  to  adjust  an  equitable  system  of 
taxation  offers  a  premium  for  villainy  rs  not  apparent ;  nor  do  I 
comprehend   what   industry  is   discouraged   by   an   equitable 
system  of  taxation,  except  it  be  the  industry  to  violate  law 
and  escape  just  and  righteous  obligations. 

3.  The  first  reason   for  your  third  article  may  be  a  good 
one,  but  I  utterly  reject  your  second  reason  as  a  perversion  of 
terms  and  an  outrage  upon  common-sense.     When  it  can  be 
shown  that  taxation  of  itself  cheapens  production  or  anything 
else,  then  it  can  be  shown  that  it  will  be  a  benefit  to  the  farmer 
and  worker  to  pay  all  the  taxes  needed  to  carry  on  govern- 
ment ;  and  when  that  is  established,  the  higher  the  tax  the 
better  it  will  be  for  them,  and  the  motive  for  economical  ad- 
ministration will  be  taken  away. 

4.  With  your  fourth  proposition  I  fully  concur. 

5.  Of  the  fifth   proposition   I  have   only  this  to  say,  that, 
while  I  believe  in  the  equity  and  justice  of  taxing  all  property 
protected  by  Government  for  its  support  and  maintenance,  I 
am  free  to  confess  that  I  do  not  believe  it  practicable,  and 
therefore  I  would  abandon  the  effort  and  tax  none.     Instead 
of  taxing  property,  real  and  personal,  to  support  the  Govern- 
ment, I  would  tax  incomes.     This,  after  all,  is  the  fairest  and 
most  equitable  system  of  taxation  ever  devised,  and  one  that 
will  ultimately  prevail  in  all  civilized  governments. 

Real  or  personal  property  may  be  and  often  is  unproductive, 


1 68  WHO   PAYS   YOUR   TAXES? 

and  then  it  is  a  hardship  on  the  owner  to  pay  taxes,  but  it  is 
never  a  burden  for  a  secure  and  ascertained  income  to  aid  in 
the  support  of  government  which  protects  the  business  or 
industry  that  yields  the  income.  True,  this  system  is  subject 
in  one  respect  to  your  objection  to  taxing  personal  property. 
It  develops  dishonesty,  perjury,  and  villainy ;  but  no  system  of 
taxation  can  be  devised  that  will  avoid  all  objections.  There- 
fore, that  which  will  accomplish  the  purpose  with  fewest 
objections  should  be  adopted. 

Very  respectfully, 

J.  G.  SHEPARD. 

Prof.  J.  G.  SHEPARD,  Attica,  New  York. 

My  Dear  Sir :  I  am  sure  that  the  interest  you  exhibit  in 
our  movement  justifies  me  in  sending  something  in  reply  to 
your  letter  of  October  2.  You  say  that  if  the  reason  we  give 
for  direct  taxation  is  a  good  one,  then  all  property  owners 
should  be  subject  to  direct  taxation.  Permit  me  to  say  that 
this  is  a  non  sequitur.  It  is  true  that  direct  taxation,  by  reason 
of  its  being  immediately  felt,  does  tend  to  prompt  the  tax- 
payer's interest  in  economical  government,  but  it  does  not 
follow  on  this  account  that  all  forms  of  property,  and  there- 
fore all  property  owners  through  such  forms,  should  be  taxed. 
There  may  be  other  considerations  that  make  it  undesirable  to 
impose  direct  taxation  upon  some  sorts  of  property. 

If  it  were  possible  to  find  a  method  of  taxation  that  should 
be  absolutely  just,  then  it  would  be  the  best  method  of  taxation, 
whether  it  were  direct  or  indirect,  and  without  regard  to  its 
special  effect  in  arousing  the  tax-payer's  interest  in  good 
government. 

If  one  were  looking  around  for  an  ideal  object  of  taxation, 
one  would  be  delighted  to  find  some  valuable  thing  properly 
belonging  to  all,  but  capable  of  being  used  at  any  given  time 
by  only  a  few.  Once  such  an  object  should  be  found,  the 


THE    UNIVERSITIES  AWAKENING. 


169 


matter  of  taxation  would  be  perfectly  simple,  for  the  users  of 
this  one  good  thing,  belonging  to  all,  would  be  required  to 
pay  the  community  in  return  for  the  special  privilege  con- 
ferred. As  you  are  aware,  Mr.  Henry  George  and  his  dis- 
ciples aver  that  land  is  such  an  object,  and  their  single  tax  is 
in  effect  such  a  system  of  taxation  as  I  have  sketched  here. 
Whether  Mr.  George  is  right  or  wrong  I  shall  not  undertake  to 
say,  as  his  proposed  single  tax  is  not  yet  a  political  issue. 
I  do  hold,  however,  that  our  proposition  has  in  it,  at  least  in 
part,  whatever -advantages  are  claimed  for  Mr.  George's  single 
tax.  For  taxation  "upon  real  estate,  of  course,  must  fall  in  part 
upon  land.  I  believe,  therefore,  that  the  system  of  taxation 
that  we  advocate  comes  as  near  to  an  ideal  system  of  taxation 
as  anything  practicable  that  has  been  suggested. 

You  believe  our  programme  in  favor  of  exempting  mort- 
gages from  taxation  to  be  specious.  If  it  be,  I  should  be 
very  glad  to  have  you  point  out  in  what  way.  Certainly  the 
effect  of  taxing  mortgages  would  be  to  raise  the  rate  of 
interest,  and  make  it  more  difficult  for  borrowers  to  obtain 
money  upon  mortgages.  The  lender  would  surely  shift  the 
burden,  and  leave  it  finally  upon  the  shoulder  of  the  borrower. 
You  insist  that  to  place  all  taxation  upon  real  estate  would  not 
be  to  lighten  the  burden  of  the  farmer  or  worker.  I  am  glad 
that  you  have  attacked  this  point,  because  our  position  is  easily 
defensible.  A  tax  upon  real  estate,  if  justly  assessed  as  we  con- 
template, would  fall  in  large  part  upon  highly  valuable  land,  in 
and  near  cities  and  towns.  While  the  home  of  the  laborer  and 
the  land  improvements  of  the  farmer  would  be  taxed,  they  cer- 
tainly would  not  be  taxed  more  heavily  than  they  now  are,  and 
they  would  probably  be  considerably  relieved.  Meanwhile,  the 
farmer's  tools  of  trade,  his  stock  and  machinery,  and  his  other 
personal  property  would  be  entirely  exempt  from  taxation  Thus 
we  should  avoid  the  petty  annoyances  attendant  upon  assess- 
ing and  collecting  personal  taxes,  and  also  the  discouragement 


WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

to  industry  involved  in  taxes  upon  capital  and  upon  tools  of 
trade. 

A  word  as  to  your  proposition  for  taxing  incomes.  Experi- 
ence the  world  over  shows  that  an  income  tax  is  the  ideally 
unjust  tax,  for  the  reason  that  it  is  placed  upon  only  a  small 
part  of  the  community,  and  usually  in  larger  proportion  upon 
honest  persons  of  moderate  incomes  than  upon  the  rich. 
Those  who  argue  in  favor  of  an  income  tax  usually  propose  to 
exempt  all  incomes  below  $1,000  per  annum,  and  proclaim  the 
justice  of  the  tax  because  it  is  placed  upon  the  rich.  In  the 
first  place,  I  greatly  question  the  justice  of  assessing  any  tax 
with  the  special  design  of  exempting  a  large  part  of  the  com- 
munity from  taxation.  In  the  next  place,  I  deny  that  income 
taxes  fall  mainly  upon  the  rich.  The  persons  that  pay  income 
taxes  are  the  comparatively  few  well-to-do  or  wealthy  persons 
who  will  honestly  answer  the  questions  of  the  assessors,  and 
those  salaried  persons  of  moderate  means  whose  incomes  are 
easily  ascertainable.  The  man  whose  income  from  various 
sources  amounts  to  many  thousands  and  possibly  millions  of  dol- 
lars is  never  known  to  pay  a  tax  upon  his  whole  income.  It  is 
a  notorious  fact,  that,  wherever  the  income  tax  has  been  tried, 
perjury  has  thriven,  and  the  honest  man  has  paid  more  than  his 
share  of  Governmental  expenses.  An  income  tax  is  open  to  most 
of  the  objections  that  apply  to  a  tax  upon  personal  property. 

If  your  interest  in  the  subject  should  prompt  you  to  write 
further  concerning  the  matter,  I  should  be  very  glad  to  hear 
from  you. 

Respectfully  yours, 

BOLTON  HALL. 

VANDERBILT  UNIVERSITY, 
NASHVILLE,  TENN.,  October  i,  1891. 

Mr.  BOLTON  HALL,  Secretary  New  York  Tax  Reform  Asso- 
ciation. 
Dear  Sir :  I  should  be  glad  to  receive  further  information 


THE    UNIVERSITIES  AWAKENING. 


I/I 


from  you  in  regard  to  your  precise  ideal  of  taxation.  In  my 
article  in  the  August  Chautauquan  I  stated  my  own  platform, 
which  in  brief  is  progressive  income  and  inheritance  taxes,  with 
real  estate  taxes  for  county  and  municipal  purposes,  and  as 
much  of  the  Henry  George  idea  as  is  involved  in  a  separation 
of  the  tax  on  ground  rent  and  that  upon  improvements,  but 
not  with  the  idea  of  making  this,  even  when  joined  to  taxes 
on  monopolies  of  light  and  transportation,  the  only  tax  ;  for  I 
agree  with  Prof.  E.  R.  A.  Seligman,  of  Columbia,  in  favoring 
income  taxes,  and  with  Dilke  (see  his  "  Problems  of  Greater 
Britain  ")  in  direct  inheritance  taxes.  And  I  believe  in  sweep- 
ing away  nearly  all  our  present  taxes,  such  as  those  on  personal 
property  and  most  licenses  so  common  in  the  South  on  trade. 
If  this  places  me  with  you,  all  right ;  but  I  have  an  idea 
you  do  not  indorse  inheritance  and  income  taxes.  How  is  it  ? 
Yours  sincerely, 

EDWARD  W.  BEMIS. 

Prof.    EDWARD  W.    BEMIS,  Vanderbilt  University,  Nashville, 

Tenn. 

My  Dear  Sir :  Your  letter  in  reply  to  one  from  this  Asso- 
ciation has  been  read  with  interest.  Your  programme  of 
income  and  inheritance  tax,  with  real  estate  for  county  and 
municipal  purposes,  is  familiar.  One  of  the  strongest  argu- 
ments against  an  income  tax  is,  that  it  offers  a  premium  upon 
dishonesty.  Honest  men  are  honestly  assessed  under  such  a 
system,  while  the  rogue  escapes.  I  believe  this  to  be  an  insu- 
perable objection  to  an  income  tax.  Another  objection  is,  that 
such  a  tax  is  to  some  extent  a  discouragement  to  industry. 
Why  fine  a  man  for  earning  a  large  income  ?  Income  tax  laws 
usually  provide  for  the  exemption  of  all  incomes  below  $1,000 
per  year.  Is  it  just  to  the  able  and  honest  man  who  earns  two 
or  three  or  four  thousand  dollars  per  year,  that  he  should  be 
made  to  pay  taxes,  while  the  dishonest  man  that  earns  twice  as 


172  WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

much,  and  the  idle  and   inept  man   that  earns  one-fourth  as 
much,  go  scot  free  ? 

As  to  the  tax  upon  inheritance,  why  discourage  the  industry 
and  economy  of  parents  who  wish  to  provide  for  their  children, 
or  husbands  who  would  care  for  wives  left  alone  and  self- 
dependent  ?  Another  objection  to  an  income  tax  lies  in  the 
fact  that  such  tax  falls  irregularly  and  often  in  large  lump 
sums.  Now,  nothing  is  more  desirable  in  the  way  of  revenue 
than  uniformity  and  certainty.  It  is  demoralizing  to  the  State 
to  have  its  treasury  suddenly  flooded  with  a  large  sum  of 
money  not  expected,  and  possibly  at  the  time  not  needed.  As 
to  the  Henry  George  idea,  it  rests  upon  a  well-known  scheme 
of  political  and  economic  philosophy,  and  whatever  may  be 
said  in  its  favor  as  an  immediate  fiscal  measure,  it  is  for  the 
present  impracticable,,  because  no  community  seems  yet  pre- 
pared for  it. 

You  add  that  you  believe  in  doing  away  with  nearly  all  of 
the  present  taxes,  such  as  those  on  personal  property  and  most 
license  taxes.  In  this  we  heartily  agree  with  you,  and  I  firmly 
believe  that  we  are  offering  the  only  system  of  taxation  that 
promises  immediate  relief  from  such  vexatious  exactions. 

I  should  be  very  glad  to  hear  from  you  further  upon  this 
subject,  if  your  interest  shall  prompt  you  to  write. 
Respectfully  yours, 

BOLTON  HALL,  Vice-President. 

WILMINGTON  COLLEGE,  WILMINGTON,  OHIO. 

BOLTON  HALL,  ESQ.,  Secretary  New  York  Tax  Reform  Asso- 
ciation. 

The  first  plank  in  your  platform  I  fully  indorse,  as  also  the 
fourth  and  fifth,  but  I  am  strongly  opposed  to  the  second  and 
third  planks.  I  favor  an  income  tax  as  being  the  most  direct, 
fairest,  and  least  burdensome  of  all  taxes.  That  capital  en- 
gaged in  profitable  enterprise  should  be  exempt  from  taxes 


THE    UNIVERSITIES  AWAKENING.  173 

seems  to  me  a  monstrous  proposition.  All  taxes  must  be  paid 
out  of  wages  or  profits,  and  of  these  the  latter  ought  to  bear 
the  heaviest  part,  since  the  most  wages  are  only  sufficient  to 
support  the  wage-earner.  To  shift  taxes  from  profit-paying 
industries  to  unproductive  real  estate— such  as  dwellings,  for 
instance — would  be  an  act  of  oppression  and  injustice.  If 
capital  were  fairly  taxed  everywhere,  how  could  it  run  away 
from  taxes  ? 

Respectfully, 

J.  B.  UNTHANK,  President. 

J.   B.  UNTHANK,   M.N.,  President  Wilmington  College,  Wil- 
mington, Ohio. 

My  Dear  Sir  ;  I  am  glad  to  learn  from  your  recent  letter 
that  you  agree  even  in  part  with  our  platform,  and  as  you  do 
not  urge  any  objections  to  planks  four  and  five,  I  shall  not 
trouble  you  with  argument  upon  that  subject.  You  say  that 
you  favor  an  income  tax  as  the  most  direct  and  fair,  and  least 
burdensome  of  all  taxation.  While  an  income  tax  is  certainly 
a  direct  tax,  I  am  inclined  to  think  it  is  one  of  the  most  unfair 
and  one  of  the  most  burdensome  that  can  possibly  be  imposed. 
An  income  tax  is  dodged  in  part  by  every  rogue,  and  thus  the 
support  of  the  government  would  fall  exclusively  on  those  too 
honest  to  conceal  the  amount  of  their  incomes.  You  surely 
cannot  deny  this,  and  if  you  acknowledge  it  you  cannot  con- 
tend that  such  a  tax  is  other  than  unfair  and  burdensome. 
Furthermore,  an  income  tax,  as  usually  administered,  is  unjust 
in  other  ways.  Income  tax  laws  usually  exempt  incomes  below 
$r,ooo  per  annum.  I  shall  say  nothing  as  to  the  wisdom  and 
justice  of  relieving  the  great  mass  of  the  people  from  the  duty 
of  contributing  their  share  toward  the  support  of  the  govern- 
ment ;  but  I  must  call  your  attention  to  the  fact  that  under 
such  a  system,  the  capable,  industrious,  honest  man  who  earns 
two,  three,  or  four  thousand  dollars  per  year  pays  taxes  on  his 


WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

full  income,  while  the  rogue  earning  and  receiving  ten  times 
as  much  goes  scot  free  on  much  of  it,  and  the  indolent  or 
incapable  man  earning  one-fourth  as  much  escapes  with  no 
payment  at  all.  Would  you  lay  a  tax  upon  honesty,  industry, 
and  capability  ? 

You  think  it  is  a  monstrous  principle  that  capital  engaged 
in  private  enterprise  should  be  exempt  from  taxes,  yet  you  will 
not  deny  that  it  is  highly  desirable  that  capital  should  engage 
in  such  enterprises,  and,  having  admitted  so  much,  I  think  you 
must  admit  that  the  State  should  impose  no  unnecessary 
hindrance  to  such  application  of  capital.  It  is  much  better 
that  capital  sunk  in  unproductive  wealth  should  be  taxed,  than 
that  productive  capital  should  be  thus  burdened.  To  shift 
capital  from  profit-paying  industries  to  unproductive  real  es- 
tate, would  be  to  encourage  not  only  capital  but  labor  as  well. 

You  ask,  if  capital  were  fairly  taxed  how  could  it  run  away 
from  taxation  ?  It  is  not  quite  clear  as  to  what  you  mean  by 
this  query,  but  I  suppose  your  idea  is  that  if  every  State  im- 
posed taxes  upon  mortgages,  bonds,  and  other  intangible 
forms  of  capital,  none  of  these  things  could  escape  taxation. 
Yet,  even  were  all  State  tax  laws  absolutely  uniform,  it  would 
be  exceedingly  difficult  to  prevent  men  from  concealing  such 
possessions,  and  if  every  State  in  this  country  should  tax  such 
forms  of  capital,  the  effect  would  only  be  to  drive  it  into 
foreign  countries  where  tax  laws  are  wiser. 

I  should  be  very  much  pleased  to  hear  from  you  again  upon 
the  subject. 

Respectfully  yours, 

BOLTON  HALL,  Secretary. 

HIAWASSEE  COLLEGE, 
HIAWASSEE,  TENN.,    September,  1891. 

Gentlemen :  Your  circulars  have  been  received  and  studied, 
Some  of  your  views  are  correct,  and  some  are  otherwise. 


THE    UNIVERSITIES  AWAKENING.  j^ 

My  neighbor  has  two  sons.  To  one  he  gives  a  farm,  and 
to  the  other  an  equal  portion  in  cash.  The  former  works  hard 
and  makes  little  gain  ;  the  latter  works  some  and  has  large 
gains.  Why  the  former  should  be  heavily  taxed  and  the 
latter  go  scot  free,  does  not  appear.  Both  had  equal  portions 
out  of  their  father's  accumulations  from  honest  labor. 
Respectfully, 

J.   H.  BRUNNER. 

Rev.  J.  H.  BRUNNER,  A.M.,  D.D.,  Hiawassee  College,  Hia- 
wassee,  Tenn. 

Sir  :  I  think  you  will  admit,  that  whatever  scheme  of  taxa- 
tion the  Government  may  establish,  it  will  be  difficult  to  avoid 
specific  cases  of  injustice  or  seeming  injustice.  I  need  not 
tell  you  that  incidental  injustice  may  be  charged  against  the 
present  system  of  federal  taxation,  whether  it  be  the  customs 
duties  or  the  internal  revenue.  It  is  certainly  the  duty  of  the 
Government  to  frame  its  laws  in  such  a  way  as  to  avoid,  if 
possible,  unjust  taxation.  But  surely  the  Government  cannot 
undertake  to  consider  the  misfortunes  of  individuals.  If  the 
farmer  worked  hard  and  did  not  prosper,  either  himself  or  his 
crops  suffered  from  the  act  of  Providence,  or  he  lacked  fore- 
sight in  the  prosecution  of  his  business,  or  failed  of  such 
financial  ability  as  was  necessary  to  insure  success.  All  this 
was  not  the  fault  of  the  Government.  If  the  other  son  suc- 
ceeded, it  must  have  been  by  reason  of  good  luck  or  manage- 
ment, neither  of  which  can  be  considered  by  the  Government 
in  laying  taxes  ;  certainly  the  good  management  should  not 
be  a  reason  for  imposing  an  extra  fine  or  tax.  But  that  some 
farmers  fail  after  hard  work,  and  some  financiers  succeed 
probably  with  little  toil,  does  not  prove  any  general  rule  touch- 
ing these  two  classes.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  it  is  probably  true 
that  there  are  more  successful  farmers,  in  proportion  to  the 
population,  than  successful  financiers. 


IV HO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

You  will  pardon  me  if  I  say  that  in  my  opinion  you  have  not 
successfully  attacked    the   proposition  we  advocate.      If  you 
feel  sufficient  interest  in  the  subject  to  continue  the  discussion, 
I  shall  be  very  glad  to  hear  from  you  again. 
Yours  very  truly, 

EDW.  N.  VALLANDIGHAM, 

For  the  Secretary. 

WASHBURN  COLLEGE, 
TOPEKA,  KAN.,  September  30,  1891. 

BOLTON  HALL,  ESQ.,  Secretary,  etc. 

Dear  Sir:  Your  favor  of  the  24th  is  received.  The  reform 
you  advocate  is  yet  in  an  incipient  state.  That  some  modifi- 
cations in  our  present  system  are  needed,  no  one  can  doubt. 
But  how  far  the  modifications  should  be  carried,  is  the  ques- 
tion which,  I  confess,  is  not  yet  clearly  defined  in  my  own 
mind.  My  judgment  is  that  the  mortgages  and  the  land 
mortgaged  should  share  in  meeting  the  taxation.  Why  should 
a  man  who  really  owns  but  a  fourth  interest  in  land  pay  four- 
fourths  of  the  tax  levied  ? 

Yours  truly, 

PETER  McViCAR,  President. 

'Rev.    PETER    McViCAR,  D.D.,  President  Washburn   College, 

Topeka,  Kan. 

Dear  Sir :  You  take  exception  to  our  principle  of  exempt- 
ing mortgages  from  taxation.  The  effect  of  taxing  mort- 
gages would  be  to  make  it  more  difficult  for  owners  of  land  to 
obtain  money  upon  such  security,  and,  of  course,  to  raise  the 
rate  of  interest  upon  mortgages.  In  this  way  the  tax  would  be 
shifted  from  the  holder  of  the  mortgage  to  the  owner  of  the 
land.  How  are  you  going  outside  the  State  jurisdiction  to 
collect  a  tax  from  the  holder  of  a  mortgage  ?  You  would 
have  to  collect  it  upon  the  interest  which  the  borrower  pays, 


THE    UNIVERSITIES  AWAKENING.  iff 

and  you  may  be  very  sure  that  if  such  a  tax  went  into  opera- 
tion, the  lenders  of  money  would  see  to  it  that  the  rate  of  in- 
terest should  be  fixed  so  as  to  make  up  to  them  for  whatever 
the  State  intercepted  on  its  way  from  the  borrower  to  the 
lender.  As  you  do  not  discuss  any  other  point  in  our  pro- 
gramme, I  shall  not  trouble  you  with  an  argument  upon  the 
whole  subject,  but  I  shall  be  glad  to  hear  anything  you  may 
have  to  say  upon  the  subject  of  taxation. 
Respectfully  yours, 

BOLTON   HALL. 

Prof.  A.  E.  ROGERS,  State  College,  Orono,  Me. 

Dear  Sir :  Your  claim  that  the  greater  part  of  the  real  estate 
of  our  land  is  held  by  farmers  is  both  right  and  wrong.  If 
you  claim  that  they  hold  the  largest  proportion  of  the  real 
estate  of  this  country  in  acres  or  feet,  you  are  right  ;  but  if 
you  claim  that  the  real  estate  held  by  them  exceeds  the  value 
of  the  real  estate  of  the  cities,  you  are  wrong. 

It  is  a  common  error,  nursed  by  men  whose  hearts  warm  to 
the  farmers,  that  this  form  of  taxation  will  weigh  more  heavily 
upon  them  than  upon  any  other  class  of  the  people  of  our 
country.  I  have  no  statistics  at  hand  ;  have  only  a  book  of 
reference,  the  Legislative  Manual  of  the  State  of  New  York, 
and  yet  I  find  this  :  in  Albany  County,  in  which  agricultural 
pursuits  are  carried  on  to  the  very  smallest  extent,  I  find 
the  real  estate  values  taxes  $93,500,000 ;  Erie  County, 
$179,000,000;  Kings  County,  $445,000,000;  New  York 
County,  $1,400,000,000,  making  a  total  of  $2,117,500,000. 
The  valuation  of  the  entire  real  estate  of  this  State,  according 
to  the  assessment  rolls,  is  $3,400,000,000,  so  that  these  urban 
counties  have  real  estate  of  two-thirds  the  value  of  all  the  real 
estate  there  is  within  this  State. 

As  to  acreage,  I  find  that  Albany  County  has  304,185  acres  ; 
Erie  County,  612,846  ;  in  Kings  and  New  York  counties  the 
12 


178  WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

values  have  gone  way  beyond  any  acreage  assessment,  but  i> 
would  be  safe  to  say  that  in  the  two  counties  there  are  not 
more  than  250,000  acres.  The  acreage  of  the  entire  State, 
subject  to  taxation,  is  about  28,000,000  acres,  and  there  you 
have  it.  One-twenty-eighth  of  the  acreage  of  the  State  is  pay- 
ing two-thirds  of  the  taxes.  Were  a  just  system  to  prevail, 
and  personal  property  taxes  to  be  abolished,  these  same  urban 
acres  would  pay  still  more  ;  and  were  justice  done  in  assessing 
real  estate  in  the  interior,  the  tax  rate  of  all  who  put  their  real 
estate  to  productive  use  would  be  decreased.  I  intend  to  ask 
a  high  statistical  authority  to  give  me  the  statistics  of  real 
estate  values,  urban  and  suburban,  in  the  whole  United  States, 
and  when  I  have  obtained  the  information  I  will  take  great 
pleasure  in  forwarding  it  to  you  ;  for  you  can  point  out,  as  an 
answer  to  the  figures  that  I  have  given  you,  that  I  am  using  as 
a  basis  the  most  populous  State  in  the  Union,  and,  in  the  event 
of  that  having  come  into  your  mind,  I  beg  to  assert  that  it 
can  be  demonstrated  beyond  a  peradventure  that  the  average 
will  remain  the  same  in  every  State  in  the  Union,  for  the 
reason  that,  where  the  urban  population  is  small,  the  suburban 
population  is  also  small,  and  there  is  a  larger  quantity  of  land 
that  has  absolutely  no  value  because  of  the  absence  of  popu- 
lation. 

You  are  carried  away  by  another  prevalent  error,  that  per- 
sonal property  is  mainly  in  the  hands  of  the  wealthy.  If  you 
mean  to  say  by  that  that  stocks,  bonds,  diamonds,  and  articles 
of  luxury  are  in  the  hands  of  the  wealthy,  you  are  right  ;  but 
these  are  not  all  that  is  included  under  the  head  of  personal 
property.  Mortgages  are  included  under  that  head,  and 
especially  mortgages  on  farms.  Now,  the  money  that  is  used 
for  that  purpose  does  not  come  from  the  wealthy.  They  know 
how  to  invest  their  money  to  better  advantage.  The  money 
invested  in  mortgages  throughout  the  United  States  is  the  sav- 
ings of  people  who  work  for  wages.  A  Wall  Street  operator 


THE  UNIVERSITIES  A  WAKENING. 


179 


is  not  content  to  let  his  money  draw  him  from  five  to  eight  per 
cent.;  he  wants  from  thirty  to  a  hundred  per  cent.,  and  takes 
chances. 

The  other  forms  of  personal  property  that  I  think  you 
have  not  in  mind  are  those  things  classed  under  the  necessi- 
ties of  the  people — food,  clothing,  and  such.  While  we  hoist 
up  the  bugaboo  of  the  personal  property  that  the  wealthy  hold 
in  the  shape  of  their  bonds,  stocks,  etc.,  the  superficial 
students  of  affairs  remain  entirely  ignorant  of  the  fact  that  the 
necessities  which  come  under  the  heading  of  personal  property 
outvalue  all  these  bonds,  stocks,  etc.,  every  year. 

In  New  York  County  we  are  assessed  on  $220,000,000  of 
personal  property.  We  have,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  about 
$1,500,000,000  of  taxable  personal  property,  mostly  hidden. 
That  $1,500,000,000  represents  an  average  of  $1,000  to  each 
man,  woman,  and  child.  The  personal  property  in  the  shape 
alone  of  the  food  we  consume  is  about  equal  every  day  to  the 
highest  figure  that  has  been  set  on  the  valuation  of  all  forms  of 
personal  property.  Then,  what  folly  it  is  for  men  to  go  round 
giving  expression  to  their  views  as  to  the  wrong  the  abolition 
of  personal  property  taxes  would  do  the  farmers — men  who 
have  given  but  a  casual  thought  to  the  subject,  many  of  them 
being  professors  of  universities. 

You  ask  whether  or  not  a  man's  farm  or  market  garden  is 
not  a  form  of  capital  engaged  in  production.  There  is  no 
economist  accepted  to-day  who  would  intimate  that  a  man's 
farm  or  "  market  garden  "  is  a  form  of  capital  engaged  in  pro- 
duction. A  man's  farm  or  his  market  garden  can  do  nothing 
without  the  assistance  or  the  help  of  the  man's  labor.  The 
product  of  that  man's  labor  applied  to  his  farm  or  market  gar- 
den results  in  a  form  of  capital  ;  or,  as  economists  would  put 
it,  wealth  that  may  be  used  for  further  production. 

I  pass  a  portion  of  your  letter  until  I  reach  the  point  where 
you  advise  us  vigorously  to  enforce  our  own  laws  and  bring 


180  WffO  PAYS   YOUR   TAXES? 

personal  property  to  the  surface.  The  inference  there  is  that 
you  would  go  back  to  the  days  of  the  robber  barons,  the  days 
of  the  rack  and  the  thumb-screw,  when  that  method  of  taxation 
had  reached  a  point  where  a  man  would  be  perfectly  honest  in 
certifying  to  his  wealth  and  yet  could  be  made  under  pressure 
to  swear  to  twenty  times  that  wealth  for  purposes  of  taxation. 
We  have  gone  beyond  that  time.  The  robbers  who  rob  us  now 
have  to  do  so  through  legislation,  or  else  we  put  them  in  jail. 
The  vassal  of  a  baron  cannot  order  us  up  to  the  castle  for  the 
purpose  of  swearing  to  anything  that  the  baron  would  have  us 
swear  to.  I  say  we  have  passed  that  stage,  and  I  don't  think 
intelligent  public  opinion  will  permit  any  legislation  that,  looks 
to  going  back  to  the  methods  of  those  "good  old  times."  ^The 
French,  people  are  far  ahead  of  Americans  in  that- matter. 
They-  have  given  up  trying  to  assess  personal  property,  for 
they  have  discovered,  as  I  told  you  in  my  last  letter,  that, per- 
sonal property  reflects  a  value  upon  real  estate  that  can  thus 
be  reached  ;  and  while  their  method  of  reaching  it  is  rather 
clumsy,  still  they  do  reach  it  in  this  way :  If  a  man  hires 
premises,  say  in  the  city  of  Paris,  for  which  he  agrees  to  pay  a 
thousand  francs  a  year,  the  authorities  thereby  presume,  that, 
as  he  can  afford  to  live  in  such  premises,  he  must  be  worth  so 
much  money,  and  they  tax  him  on  the  amount  that  they  think 
he  is  worth  on  that  basis. 

You  are  carried  away  with  the  mistaken  impression  that 
existed  in  Cardinal  McCloskey's  mind  up  to  the  day  of  his 
death  ;  viz.,  that  land  was  to  be  taxed  according  to  its  area  and 
not  according  to  its  value.  I  remember  reading  of  the  cele- 
brated case 'in  which  he  called  upon  one  of  his  parish  priests  to 
explain  why  he  advocated  a  tax  that  would  result  in  cutting  up 
the  land  of  the  city  of  New  York  into  little  bits. 

I  attempted  at  one  time  to  convert  a  good  old  moss-backed 
countryman  to  this  idea.  I  argued  with  him  for  nearly  three 
years  and  then  converted  him  suddenly  one  day  by  accident 


THE    UNIVERSITIES  AWAKENING.  \%\ 

He  was  visiting  me  in  this  city,  and  I  took  him  for  a  walk. 
We  passed  the  Madison  Square  Garden,  and  he  seemed  so  im- 
pressed with  its  magnificence  that  we  stayed  there  looking  and 
walking  around  it  for  nearly  half  an  hour  ;  finally  his  admira- 
tion found  words,  and,  farmer-like,  he  wanted  to  know  what  it 
was  worth.  He  was  a  resident  of  Sullivan  County,  and  I  told 
him  that  that  block  with  the  building  on  it  was  worth  more 
than  the  entire  real  estate  and  personal  property  value  of  the 
whole  of  Sullivan  County  ;  that,  whereas  you  could  not  ride  on 
horseback  from  one  end  of  Sullivan  County  to  the  other  in  two 
days,  you  could  walk  around  this  piece  of  property  in  five  min- 
utes, and  yet  it  was  worth  more  than  all  the  property  he  could 
ride  over  in  two  days.  It  made  an  impression  on  him  which 
did  not  find  expression  in  words  until  he  got  home,  when  he 
wrote  me  saying  that  he  saw  the  point  at  last. 

I  believe  it  to  be  only  necessary  to  bring  our  farmer  friends 
down  to  this  city,  and  show  them  one  city  block  after  another 
that  is  worth  more  than  the  entire  county  they  live  in,  to  con- 
vert them  to  our  way  of  thinking.  But  the  funds  of  this  asso- 
ciation wilt  not  permit  of  that  form  of  procedure. 

Hoping  to  hear  further  from  you  on  this  subject,  I  am, 
Very  truly  yours, 

WILLIAM  McCABE,  Ass't  Secretary, 
New  York  Tax  Reform  Association. 

UNIVERSITY  OF  PENNSYLVANIA, 

PHILADELPHIA,  June  23,  1891. 
BOLTON  HALL,  ESQ.,  New  York  Tax  Reform  Association. 

My  Dear  Sir  :  I  thank  you  for  the  copy  of  your  associa- 
tion's statement  of  principles.  It  is  one  which  I  can  indorse 
very  heartily,  except  at  one  point.  I  would  alter  the  third 
article  to  read,  "  Real  estate  and  incomes  should  bear,"  etc.  I 
fail  to  see  why  a  rich  man  should  be  allowed  to  exempt 
himself  from  the  direct  payment  of  taxes  by  abstaining  from 


1 82  WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAX£$? 

investments  in  land  and  houses ;  and  I  am  not  clear  that  taxes 
on  land  and  houses  will  so  distribute  themselves  as  to  reach  all 
classes  in  proportion  to  the  amount  of  the  protection  they 
receive  from  the  State,  and  also  to  their  ability  to  pay  for  that 
protection. 

Very  truly  yours, 

R.   E.   THOMPSON. 

COLUMBIA  COLLEGE, 
NEW  YORK  CITY,  October  28,  1891. 
BOLTON  HALL,  ESQ. 

Dear  Sir  :  Your  letter  addressed  to  President  Low,  as  well 
as  the  one  intended  for  the  Quarterly,  have  been  handed  to  me 
for  reply.  I  would  say  that  point  one  in  the  platform  meets 
my  approval,  looked  at  from  the  theoretic  point  of  view. 

If  point  two  means  that  personal  property  should  be  ex- 
empt, I  agree.  But  as  to  mortgages,  I  believe  that  they  should 
be  assessed  to  the  mortgagee  as  real  property,  as  is  done  in 
California.  Point  three  would  meet  my  approval  if  the  word 
"  local "  were  inserted  before  the  word  "taxation."  But  the 
last  part  of  the  sentence  I  do  not  agree  with.  I  do  not  think 
it  can  be  proven  that  they  bear  least  heavily  on  the  farmer. 
The  remainder  of  the  platform  is,  of  course,  self-evident,  and 
therefore  meets  with  my  approval.  But  I  would  say  that,  on 
the  whole,  I  consider  your  platform  a  little  too  negative. 
There  should  be  more  positive,  constructive  assertion  in  it. 
Yours  truly, 

EDWIN  R.  A.  SELIGMAN. 

JOHNS  HOPKINS  UNIVERSITY,  MARYLAND, 

BALTIMORE,  May  6,  1891. 
BOLTON  HALL,  ESQ. 

My  Dear  Sir :  I  am  much  interested  in  your  letter  of  the 
5th  inst.,  but  am  unable  to  indorse  your  tax  reform  platform. 


THE  UNIVERSITIES  AWAKENING.  183 

I  do  not  accept  it  entirely  as  it  stands,  and  I  feel  very  con- 
fident that  I  should  be  unable  to  approve  of  any  practical 
application  which  might  grow  out  of  it.  I  am  not  entirely 
opposed  to  the  taxation  of  capital  engaged  in  production,  and 
do  not  believe  that  it  necessarily  drives  capital  away. 
Very  truly  yours, 

RICHARD  T.   ELY. 

COLLEGE  OF  NEW  JERSEY, 
PRINCETON,  December  g,  1891. 

BOLTON  HALL,  ESQ.,  Secretary  New  York  Tax  Reform  Asso- 
ciation. 

Dear  Sir :  On  the  whole,  I  very  heartily  indorse  the  above 
platform. 

Yours, 

WOODROW  WILSON, 
Professor  Jurisprudence  and  Political  Economy. 

YALE  UNIVERSITY, 
NEW  HAVEN,  December  14,   1891. 

BOLTON  HALL,  ESQ. 

Dear  Sir:  I  beg  to  assure  you,  in  behalf  of  the  department 
of  political  economy  at  Yale,  of  our  hearty  sympathy  in  your 
efforts  to  secure  intelligent  discussion  of  the  subject  of  tax 
reform. 

Sincerely  yours, 

ARTHUR  T.  HADLEY. 

UNIVERSITY  OF  THE  CITY  OF  NEW  YORK, 
September  22,  1891. 

Mr.    BOLTON    HALL,    New    York    Tax    Reform    Association, 

in  Broadway,  City. 

My  Dear  Sir :  Since  it  was  my  lot  in  past  years  to  lecture 
upon  political  economy,  and  to  take  a  lively  interest  in  civics,  I 


I $4  WHO   PAYS  YOUR   TAXES? 

am  quite  inclined  to  give  an  opinion  on  your  platform,  and 
that  a  favorable  one. 

I  regard  the  system  of  municipal  taxes  in  most  of  the  States 
with  which  I  am  acquainted,  as  inexpedient  from  an  economic 
point  of  view,  and  very  objectionable  from  an  ethical  stand- 
point. Matters  would  be  greatly  improved  if  your  platform 
could  be  adopted  and  faithfully  carried  out. 
Sincerely  yours, 

H.  M.  MACCRACKEN. 

HARVARD  UNIVERSITY, 
CAMBRIDGE,    MASS.,  October  17,  1891. 

Dear  Sir:  I  agree  with  the  platform  of  the  New  York 
Tax  Reform  Association,  and  heartily  with  the  association's 
success  in  enlightening  the  public  mind  concerning  the  whole 
subject  of  taxation. 

Very  truly  yours, 

CHARLES  W.   ELIOT. 
Mr.   BOLTON  HALL,  Vice-President. 


CHAPTER   XII. 

PRESS    DISCUSSIONS. 

Early  interest  of  the  newspapers  in  the  Tax  Reform  Association. — Sample 
letter  to  a  country  newspaper. — Various  press  opinions. 

AN  important  feature  of  the  Tax  Reform  Association's 
work  has  been  its  correspondence  with  newspapers  and 
periodicals.  The  objects  of  the  association  were  fully 
presented  to  many  hundreds  of  newspapers,  and  large 
quantities  of  documents  were  distributed  to  the  press. 
The  result  was  a  widespread  and  interesting  discussion 
of  the  subject.  In  many  instances  editors  promptly 
denounced  the  association,  manifestly  without  having 
examined  its  arguments,  but  for  the  most  part  the 
press  meted  out  fair  treatment  to  the  question.  A 
list  of  papers  that  have  commented  on  the  associa- 
tion, with  note  of  their  attitude,  will  be  found  in  the 
appendix. 

The  letter  that  follows  is  inserted  as  a  good  example 
of  the  discussion  that  is  carried  on  with  country  papers. 
These  papers  willingly  print  matter  touching  the  subject, 
and  eagerly  argue  the  question : 


1 86  WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES* 

To  the  Editor  of  the  Evening  Star, 

Greenbush,  Rensselaer  County,  N.  Y. 

Dear  Sir  ;  Your  letter  of  November  20,  inviting  me  to 
send  another  letter  from  the  Tax  Reform  Association,  is  noted. 
I  am  sorry  that  you  are  not  converted  to  our  views  of  taxation. 

Taxation  lies  at  the  root  of  the  people's  prosperity  or  pov- 
erty. When  more  taxes  are  drawn  than  are  necessary  for  the 
economical  support  of  government,  or  when  taxes  are  drawn 
from  an  entire  people  in  order  that  a  few  may  benefit,  the 
nation  suffers.  The  more  taxes  are  levied  on  the  necessities 
of  the  people,  the  less  becomes  their  ability  to  buy  ;  and  it  is 
to  the  unjust  methods  that  have  prevailed  so  long,  that  the 
present  stagnant  condition  of  business  and  production  in  this 
country  may  be  attributed.  The  people  of  the  United  States 
are  awakening  to  that  fact,  and  I  think  it  may  be  said  without 
dispute  that  the  question  of  taxation  is  now  to  the  fore,  and 
will  not  be  settled  until  it  is  settled  right. 

This  association  was  formed  by  men  who  saw  all  sides  of 
the  question.  They  realized  that  a  tax  on  personal  property 
had  been  the  means  of  increasing  the  price  of  commodities, 
and  had  also  resulted  in  driving  from  this  city  hundreds  of 
millions  of  dollars  of  capital.  For  the  verification  of  this  state- 
ment, I  refer  you  to  the  testimony  of  Tax  Commissioner  Cole- 
man  before  the  Fassett  Committee,  two  years  ago.  In  that 
testimony,  Commissioner  Coleman  said  that  the  effect  of  the 
personal  property  tax  laws  in  the  State  of  New  York  had  been 
to  drive  an  enormous  amount  of  wealth  from  the  city  of  New 
York,  and  that  especially  in  the  year  ending  1889  over  six 
hundred  millions-  of  corporation  capital  had  left  this  city  and 
taken  charters  in  the  States  of  Connecticut  and  New  Jersey. 
He  also  asserted  that  the  effect  of  the  exodus  of  such  enormous 
amount  of  capital  was  felt  by  the  real  estate  and  business  in- 
terests of  this  city. 


DISCUSSIONS.  1 87 

Now,  every  one  knows  that  when  capital  moves  from  a  cer- 
tain place,  business  is  to  that  extent  hampered,  and  real  estate 
values  fall. 

What  the  members  of  this  association  wish  to  do  is  to  open 
the  doors  wide,  so  that  all  capital  that  may  seek  investment 
shall  come  to  this  financial  centre.  The  real  estate  owners 
connected  with  this  association  realize  that  an  inflow  of  capital 
and  products  of  industry  to  this  city  would  increase  the  value 
of  their  real  estate  to  such  an  extent  that  they  could  afford  to 
pay  the  increased  tax  on  that  real  estate,  because  of  the  largely 
added  value  that  would  be  given.  This  brings  up  the  question 
of  what  it  is  that  gives  value  to  real  estate  ?  If  a  plague 
were  to  visit  this  city,  and  all  the  inhabitants  should  move 
away,  taking  with  them  their  goods,  the  value  of  the  real  estate 
here,  despite  the  labor  that  has  been  put  upon  it  and  the  popu- 
lation that  has  been  clustered  on  it  for  nearly  three  hundred 
years,  would  disappear  entirely,  and  all  the  massive  buildings 
of  the  city  of  New  York  that  have  been  erected  during  that 
time  would  not  be  worth  the  value  that  is  now  placed  on  a 
single  structure.  The  island  would  be  worth  little  more  than 
it  was  at  the  time  when  the  Dutch  bought  it  from  the  Indians. 
If  what  I  have  said  is  true,  then  it  is  a  fact  that  real  estate  of 
itself  has  no  value  ;  that  its  value  is  given  to  it  by  the  gather- 
ing together  of  population,  and  the  accumulation  of  the  prod- 
ucts of  industry,  or,  as  we  would  put  it,  personal  property.  If 
the  great  money  centre  of  this  city  were  suddenly  to  shift 
itself  from  the  vicinity  of  Wall  Street  up  to  Harlem,  and  the 
business  now  carried  on  around  Wall  Street  were  to  be  carried 
on  up  in  the  new  district  in  Harlem,  the  effect  would  inevit- 
ably be  that  the  real  estate  values  that  now  cluster  around 
Wall  Street  would  be  shifted  to  Harlem.  The  reason  that  real 
estate  in  New  York  City  is  worth  thousands  of  dollars  a  front 
foot,  while  real  estate  in  your  village  is  probably  worth  from 
five  to  twenty  dollars  a  front  foot,  is  because  there  is  more 


!88  WHO   PAYS  YOUR   TAXES? 

population  and  personal  property  here  than  there  is  in  Green- 
bush.  If  the  inhabitants  of  this  city,  when  they  deserted  the 
island,  were  to  settle  in  and  around  Greenbush,  the  real  estate 
values  which  now  belong  to  this  city  would  very  quickly 
change  themselves  to  your  village,  and  New  York  City  would 
not  be  worth  then  what  the  village  of  Greenbush  is  worth  to- 
day. I  cite  these  points  to  try  to  bring  you  into  agreement 
with  me  as  to  what  factors  give  real  estate  its  value,  and  if 
my  points  are  wrong  I  hope  you  will  demonstrate  where  I  am 
in  error. 

Personal  property  consists,  under  the  laws  of  this  State,  of 
bonds,  mortgages,  and  other  forms  of  capital,  food,  clothing, 
and  the  things  necessary  to  satisfy  human  desires.  Our  -food 
and  clothing  in  their  primary  state  come  to  us  from  the  farm. 
Some  of  these  adjuncts  come  directly  to  the  consumer,  while 
others  have  to  go  through  processes  in  factories,  etc.,  before 
they  are  ready  for  consumption.  As  far  as  I  can  think  now, 
nearly  everything  necessary  to  satisfy  the  natural  appetites  of 
men  is  the  product  of  the  soil,  and  therefore  comes  properly 
from  the  farm.  Surely,  all  men  engaged  in  "agricultural  pur- 
suits will  agree  that  the  cheaper  these  things  can  be  sold  to 
the  consumer  the  more  of  them  will  be  bought  and  consumed. 
If  I  am  correct,  why  should  the  farmer  be  an  advocate  of 
personal  property  taxation  ?  If  he  can  raise  a  thing  profitably 
for  sale  for  a  dollar,  why  should  the  consumer  be  called  upon 
to  pay  a  dollar  and  a  half  for  it  ?  This  is  exactly  the  idea 
that  the  farmer  favors  when  he  favors  a  personal  property  tax. 
He  ought  plainly  to  see  that  where  a  man  can  buy  a  thing  for 
a  dollar,  and  the  price  of  that  thing  is  raised  to  a  dollar  and  a 
half,  a  man  can  afford  to  buy  less.  Or,  I  will  put  it  this 
way  :  a  chicken  can  be  bought  a  hundred  miles  from  New 
York  for  thirty  cents  ;  that  same  chicken  will  cost  the  consu- 
mer in  this  city  a  dollar.  The  result  is  that  the  people  in  the 
neighborhood  where  the  chicken  was  raised  can  indulge  them- 


.PJtESS.  .DISCUSSIONS. 


189 


selves  very  largely  in  chicken' meat,  and  they  do  so  ;  while  the 
people  of  this  city,  who  would  naturally  prefer  chicken  meat 
to  corned  beef,  are  compelled  to  eat  more  of  the  corned  beef 
for  which  they  care  less,  and  less  of  the  chicken  for  which 
they  care  more.  I  think  this  is. a  demonstration  which  can  be 
amplified  so  as  to  include  all  that  a  farmer  raises. 

In  this  same  district  if  you  stop  at  a  farmhouse  and  ask  for 
a  drink  of  water,  they  will  invariably  ask  you  to  take  a  glass  of 
milk,  for  the  reason  that  milk  on  that  farm  is  so  plenty  that 
the  farmer  loses  practically  nothing  by  tendering  a  glass  of 
milk  in  lieu  of  water,  while  he  has  the  satisfaction ,  of  having 
been  hospitable.  In  this  city  that  same '.glass  of .  milk  ;  which 
was  tendered  so  freely  would  have 'cost  fiveLcents  ;  the  result 
is  that  in  that  section  people  drink  a  great, deal  of  milk,  while 
in  this  city  milk  costs  money,  and  the  people  therefore  drink  a 
great  deal  of  water. 

The  factories  in  which  the  changes  in  the ". production  of  the 
farm  are  made  to  fit  them  for  their  various  'uses  are  in  the  cen- 
tres of  population.  This  is  the  most  crowded  and  the  largest 
factory  city  in  the  United  States.  In  our 'factories  the  prod- 
ucts of  the  farm  are  taken  and  transformed  into  things  for  the 
gratification  of  man,  in  the  process  of  which  much  labor  is 
necessary.  The  effect  of  personal  property  taxation-is  to  make 
these  products  cost  the  consumer  more  than  they  would  if  there 
was  no  tax  on  them  ;  the  result  of  that  is  that  the  people  con- 
sume less  of  them  ;  the  result  of  that  is  that  less  labor  is  needed 
in  the  manufacture  of  these  products  ;  the  result  of 'that  is  that 
the  manufacturer  needs  less  of  the  farmer's  products  ;  the 
result  of  that  is  that  the  farmer  is  prevented  from  putting  his 
farm  to  the  fullest  use,  and  the  result  of  that  is  dull  times. 
So,  you  see,  that  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  the  farmer  is  a 
stanch  advocate  of  the  taxation  of  personal  property,  in  the 
hope  that  he  may  be  able  to  reach  the  capitalists  of  New  York 
City,  he,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  adds  to  the  weight  of  the  yoke 


I90  WHO   PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

about  his  neck,  and  at  the  same  time  he  puts  burdens  upon  the 
backs  of  the  producing  populations  of  the  cities  ;  for  were  tax- 
ation taken  off  the  products  of  the  farm  and  of  the  factory, 
those  things  would  be  reduced  in  price,  more  people  would  be 
able  to  buy,  more  labor  would  be  necessary  in  the  production 
of  those  things,  an  increased  demand  would  come  for  labor,  the 
glut  of  the  labor  market  would  be  relieved,  and  wages  would  be 
raised  ;  and  there,  I  think,  is  the  whole  situation  in  a  nutshell. 

The  real  estate  owners,  of  whom  this  association  is  largely 
composed,  realize  all  these  things,  and  have  also  realized  that 
the  change  which  they  hope  to  see  would  add  to  the  value  of 
their  property,  and  that  therefore  they  could  easily  bear  the 
added  burden  that  would  fall  upon  them  through  the  abolition 
of  personal  property  taxes. 

"  But,"  says  the  farmer,  "  you  don't  touch  upon  the  point 
that  we  have  in  mind — how  about  mortgages,  which  are  also 
personal  property  ?"  Well,  the  fact  is  this  :  The  money  placed 
on  farm  mortgages  by  the  banking  corporations  does  not  come 
from  the  Wall  Street  men  at  all.  No  man  who  does  business 
in  Wall  Street  is  satisfied  with  an  income  of  five  or  six  per  cent. 
The  bulk  of  the  money  placed  on  mortgages  on  the  farms  of 
this  country  is  the  savings  of  the  poor  people,  and  not  the 
money  of  what  the  farmer  so  sneeringly  calls  "  the  Wall  Street 
sharks."  The  Wall  Street  shark  wants  to  turn  his  money  fast ; 
he  wants  to  make  from  thirty  to  seventy  per  cent,  a  year,  while 
the  people  who  work  for  wages  and  deposit  their  little  savings 
in  the  savings  banks  are  satisfied  almost  to  know  that  the 
money  for  which  they  have  worked  so  hard  is  in  a  place  of 
security,  not  to  speak  of  the  matter  of  interest.  And  the  sav- 
ings banks,  when  they  loan  money  on  mortgages  of  any  descrip- 
tion, are  very  sure  to  include  in  the  amount  of  interest  that  the 
mortgageors  have  to  pay  the  amount  of  the  State  personal  prop- 
erty tax  on  mortgages.  This  is  a  case,  without  doubt,  in  which 
the  State  does  get  its  revenue  ;  that  is  to  say,  when  money  is 


PRESS  DISCUSSIONS.  \g\ 

borrowed  directly  from  the  banks.  But  when  you  are  borrow- 
ing money  on  mortgage  from  the  money  lender,  while  he  adds 
the  State  personal  property  tax  to  the  interest  that  you  must 
pay  him  for  the  use  of  his  money,  you  have  no  guarantee 
that  the  State  gets  that  personal  property  mortgage  tax.  The 
chances  are  that,  if  the  money  lender  is  imbued  with  the  spirit 
of  old  Adam,  he  quietly  puts  that  extra  tax  in  his  own  pocket, 
and  the  farmer  and  the  State  are  both  losers. 

It  is  an  old  error  among  the  farmers  in  thinking  that  the 
personal  property  tax  on  mortgages  comes  out  of  the  m?  i 
who  loans  the  money.  If  the  farmer  who  has  a  mortgap;.  on 
his  farm  should  suddenly  find  his  situation  changed  ar<-should 
find  himself  able  to  loan  money  on  mortgage,  I  \a,ve  not  the 
slightest  doubt  that  he  would,  in  loaning  his  money  on  farm 
mortgages,  take  into  consideration  the  tax  that  the  State 
demands  ;  and  I  have  also  not  the  slightest  doubt  that  if  he 
could  pocket  that  tax  without  any  one  being  the  wiser,  he  would 
do  it.  Most  mortgages  can  now  be  hidden  from  any  assessor, 
and  if  laws  were  passed  to  put  the  screws  on  the  money  lender 
to  make  him  exhibit  his  mortgages,  he  would  not  loan  his 
money  without  extra  interest  or  bonus  so  as  to  secure  him  a 
reasonable  profit  for  the  use  of  his  money. 

It  is  the  mortgage  part  of  the  personal  property  tax  that  the 
farmers  and  their  press  especially  dwell  upon,  and  I  think  I 
have  demonstrated  that  in  trying  to  increase  the  burdens  of  the 
men  who  lend  their  money  on  farm  mortgages  they  are  chasing 
a  ghost  that  will  never  be  there  when  the  farmers  try  to  place 
their  hands  on  it. 

We  know  that  the  representatives  of  some  of  the  farming 
constituencies  are  going  to  introduce  rigorous  personal  prop- 
erty tax  bills  in  the  coming  legislature.  This  association 
desires  to  see  all  those  bills  defeated,  and  to  see  the  personal 
property  tax  abolished.  But,  if  that  cannot  be  done,  the  next 
best  thing  will  be  to  have  those  bills  passed  and  put  into 


I92 


WHO   PAYS, YOUR  TAXES 


immediate -operation  ;  for  we  know  that  with  the  adoption  and 
carrying  out  of  one-half  the  threatened  measures,  there  would 
go  lip"  such  a  cry  from  the  people  of  this  State  (especially  the 
farmers),  :as  would  make  it  more  than  a- man's  political  reputa- 
tion is  worth  ever  to  advocate  such  a  measure  again. 
Yours  very  truly, 

WM.  McCABE,  Assistant  Secretary, 

New  York  Tax  Reform  Association. 

Here  are  a  few  notable  press  opinions  taken  from  a 
great  number : 

HOW    THE    PERSONAL    PROPERTY    TAX    LAW    OPERATED. 

If  the  .assessment  returns  are  to  be  believed,  in  nine-tenths 
of  California  there  is  not  a  pound  of  butter  made.  In  four- 
fifths  of  the  State  the  sheep  do  not  produce  any  wool ;  only 
four  counties  produce  honey.  Personal  property  has  vanished 
from  San  Francisco  ;  loans  of  money  are  becoming  unknown 
in  the  rest  of  the  State ;  bonds  of  cities  and  municipalities  of 
all  kinds  are  not  held  within  the  State  to  an  amount  equal  to 
one-sixth  of  the  county  bonds  outstanding  alone  ;  and,  finally, 
money  has  been  smitten  by  a  pestilence,  two-thirds  of  all  that 
there  was  in  California  before  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution 
having  taken  to  itself  wings,  and  the  remainder  being  evidently 
on  the  way. — Long  Islander,  Huntington,  Suffolk  County, 
N.  Y. 

PEOPLE    POORER,    REAL    ESTATE    RICHER. 

The  fact  stated  is  that  during  the  decade  1880-1890  the 
assessed  valuation  for  purposes  of  taxation  of  real  estate  in 
New  York  City  increased  nearly  fifty  per  cent.  (48.4),  while  in 
the  same  period  personal  estate  subject  to  taxation  decreased 
i8j  per  cent.  Now,  it  is  a  well-known  fact  that  the  personal 


PXESS  DISCUSSIONS. 


193 


property  held  by  citizens  of  this  city  has  not  only  increased, 
but  has  swelled  to  enormous  proportions  during  the  past  ten 
years. — New  York  Financier,  New  York  City. 

TAXING    THEMSELVES. 

When  such  real  estate  owners  demand  the  abolition  of  all 
taxes  on  personal  properties,  we  may  readily  suppose  that  they 
have  good  arguments  to  present,  which  will  be  listened  to 
respectfully. — Herald,  New  York  City. 

THE  BLUNDER  OF  TAXING  PERSONAL  PROPERTY. 

The  Troy  Herald  is  laboring  under  the  manifest  misconcep- 
tion that  when  the  trunk  of  a  tree  is  bored  for  sap  the  limbs 
escape.  In  order  to  tax  the  tree  equitably,  it  would  with  vastly 
increased  labor,  expense,  and  annoyance  get  up  among  the 
branches  and  put  a  hole  into  each  one,  according  to  its  size,  so 
as  not  to  overtax  the  trunk.  The  advocates  of  a  tax  on  per- 
sonal property  and  incomes  usually  make  the  same  blunder  in 
their  process  of  reasoning. —  Troy  Press,  Troy,  Rensselaer 
County,  N.  Y. 

AN    OPAQUE    VIEW    OF    IT. 

A  more  thorough  scheme  of  wholesale  robbery  (that  of  the 
New  York  Tax  Reform  Association)  has  never  been  devised. 
The  party  that  ingrafts  such  a  scheme  into  its  platform  this 
fall  will  be  buried  out  of  sight.  There  are  fifty  millionaire 
families  in  New  York  City  whose  holdings  in  personal  property 
are  such  that  they  could  better  afford  to  pay  half  the  taxes  of 
this  State  than  that  real  estate  should  bear  it  all. — Advertiser, 
Geneva,  Ontario  County,  N.  Y. 

"D D    SCOUNDRELS." 

The  whole  principle  of  the  New  York  Tax  Reform  Associa- 
tion is  a  finely  constructed  and  cunningly  devised  method  for 
13 


WHO  PAYS   YOUR   TAXES? 

the  rich  to  shirk  the  responsibility  of  doing  their  share  toward 
supporting  their  State  government — a  cowardly  and  despicable 
thing  to  do. — Alliance  Leader,  Belmont,  Alleghany  County, 
N.  Y. 

AS   JACK    BUNSBY    WOULD    SAY. 

Because  it  is  more  difficult  to  trace  possession  and  reveal 
ownership  of  personal  property,  and  in  consequence  the  tax 
as  levied  becomes  partial  and  unjust  toward  some  persons, 
operating  in  favor  of  the  unscrupulous  and  knavish  as  against 
the  honest  and  truthful,  makes  no  really  valid  or  sufficient 
reason  for  abolition  of  the  tax.  It  does,  however,  furnish  an 
additional  reason  for  extending  and  systematizing  the  taxation 
of  corporations. — Republican  Watchman,  Greenport,  Suffolk 
County,  N.  Y. 

We  hope  the  next  legislature  will  pass  a  listing  law  which 
will  require  every  adult  to  make  a  sworn  statement  of  his 
property;  and,  if  any  one  refuses  to  make  such  a  statement,  let 
the  assessor  be  authorized  to  affix  such  a  valuation  as  he  deems 
fair  and  then  compel  the  collection  of  the  tax  on  that  estimate. 
It  is  high  time  the  farmers  had  justice  done  them  in  this  mat- 
ter, and  we  trust  that  another  winter  will  not  be  permitted  to 
pass  without  definitely  settling  this  vexed  question. — Record, 
Marlborough,  Ulster  County,  N.  Y. 

WANTS   IMMEDIATE    RETURNS. 

We  warn  the  New  York  Tax  Reform  Association  that  if  the 
benefit  the  farmer  is  to  derive  from  the  new  system  is  of  that 
indirect  kind  which  is  to  come  from  assuming  the  main  burden 
of  taxation  himself,  so  that  capital  may  be  encouraged  to 
engage  in  "industry,"  it  will  be  up  hill  work  making  converts 
among  the  farmers.  The  experience  which  they  have  derived 
from  taxing  themselves  to  secure  a  "home  market"  for  their 


PRESS  DISCUSSIONS. 


195 


product  is  not  of  a  character  to  induce  farmers  to  act  hastily 
in  voluntarily  taking  upon  themselves  further  burdens  to 
secure  some  indirect  and  remote  benefit. — Democrat,  Ithaca, 

N.  Y. 

HOW    IT    WOULD    WORK. 

The  exemption  of  personal  property  to  a  great  degree  will 
attract  much  business  to  the  city  and  State.  Only  the  other 
day  the  statement  was  made  that  our  system  of  taxation  had 
driven  millions  of  manufacturing  capital  from  New  York  to 
New  Jersey,  and  the  New  Jersey  farmer  is  feeding  thousands 
of  operatives  who  might  just  as  well  be  consumers  of  the 
New  York  farmer's  products. — Evening  Journal,  Jamestown, 
Chautauqua  County. 

MONEY    DRIVEN    AWAY.       MICHIGAN    FAILS    AT    IT. 

Michigan  has  always  had  a  law  taxing  mortgages.  It  was 
easily  evaded.  Four  years  ago  the  legislature  enacted  a 
system  of  searching  the  records  and  notifying  supervisors  so 
that  they  could  put  the  screws  to  all  mortgagees  living  in  the 
State.  What  was  the  result  ?  Money  was  at  once  sent  out  of 
the  State,  and  is  being  sent  out  all  the  time,  for  investment. 
We  happen  to  know  of  large  sums  that  were  sent  away.  The 
rate  of  interest  increased,  and  the  law  injured  every  material 
interest  of  our  people.  Not  long  ago  a  good  loan  of  ten 
thousand  dollars  was  wanted  on  city  property,  No  one  would 
take  it.  It  was  placed  outside  of  the  State.  There  it  is  not 
taxable. — Patriot,  Jackson,  Mich. 

DON'T    ATTEMPT    THE    IMPOSSIBLE. 

There  are  those  who  will  say  that  it  is  not  fair  and  just  that 
the  rich  man  who  owns  mortgages,  and  bonds,  and  stocks, 
should  go  "  scot  free,"  while  the  owner  of  real  estate  has  to 
pay  a  heavy  tax.  In  reply  to  this,  the  owner  of  personal  prop- 


196  WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

erty  will  go  "  scot  free  "  in  spite  of  all  your  efforts  to  capture 
him.  Money  is  easily  transferred,  and  can  be  moved  from 
one  State  or  country  to  another  on  the  very  shortest  notice  ; 
in  fact,  it  only  takes  a  few  ticks  of  the  telegraph  to  transfer  an 
immense  fortune  from  New  York  to  London. — Long  Islander, 
Huntington,  Suffolk  County,  N.  Y. 

WILLING    TO    CONSIDER. 

Some  of  the  articles  in  the  creed  of  the  New  York  Tax 
Reform  Association  we  are  inclined  to  favor,  as  possible  re- 
forms of  the  near  future.  Among  these  is  the  doctrine,  now 
growing  in  popular  favor,  that  the  products  of  labor  and  enter- 
prise, especially  those  employed  in  further  production  or  in 
trade,  should  bear  as  light  a  burden  of  taxation  as  practica- 
ble.— Daily  Union,  Schenectady,  Schenectady  County,  N.  Y. 


APPENDIX. 

PRINCIPLES   ILLUSTRATED   IN   DIALOGUE. 

PERHAPS  the  aims  and  principles  of  the  Tax  Reform  Association  will  be 
made  clear  to  some  by  the  following  dialogue  : 

Jasper  :  Mr.  Tax  Reformer,  I  have  read  your  platform  and  I  have  come 
to  you  for  information.  Tell  me  what  it  is  you  want  to  do. 

Tax  Reformer  :  We  want  to  abolish  all  personal  property  taxes,  and  raise 
the  revenue  for  the  support  of  Government  by  a  tax  on  real  estate. 

J. :  That's  it,  eh  ?  Well,  how  is  that  going  to  affect  me  ?  I  am  a  poor 
man  ;  I  have  bought  a  lot  from  a  rich  man  for  $2,000 ;  I  have  paid  $500 
down  ;  he  holds  a  mortgage  of  $1,500  ;  I  have  to  pay  two  taxes,  spring 
and  fall,  and  the  interest  ;  now  tell  me,  where  is  your  justice  in  robbing  the 
poor  man  in  that  way  ?  I  contend  that  the  holder  of  that  $1,500  mortgage 
on  my  property  should  pay  taxes. 

T.  R. :  The  justice,  so  far  as  you  are  concerned,  is  in  this :  were  the 
taxes  taken  off  mortgages,  the  interest  you  have  to  pay  on  your  mortgage 
would  be  reduced. 

J. :  I  don't  see  that.  The  man  holds  a  mortgage  on  my  property  now, 
and  the  rate  of  interest  that  I  have  to  pay  is  fixed.  Why  should  he  not  be 
made  to  pay  taxes  on  the  interest  that  he  receives  from  me  on  my  mortgage  ? 

T.  R. :  I  hope  you  do  not  consider  for  a  moment  that  the  tax  on  the 
mortgage  this  rich  man  holds  on  your  property  is  paid  by  him  ;  if  you  do 
think  so,  you  are  a  very  silly  man.  When  he  loaned  you  that  $1,500  on 
your  property,  he  kept  in  view  the  fact  that  the  Government  expected  him  to 
pay  a  tax  on  that  mortgage,  and  for  that  very  reason  he  charged  you  a  higher 
rate  of  interest  than  he  would  otherwise  have  charged  ;  or,  if  he  did 
not  add  the  tax  he  would  have  to  pay  to  the  interest  you  have  to  pay  him, 
he  got  it  in  another  form,  probably  in  the  shape  of  a  bonus.  To  put  it 
another  way  :  A  business  man  has  $1,500  to  loan  on  mortgage  ;  he  expects 
that  $1,500  to  earn  him  a  certain  interest.  Now,  he  knows  that  there  is  a 


198  WHO  PA  YS  YOUR   TAXES? 

State  law  which  says  that  mortgages  shall  pay  a  certain  per  cent  tax  on 
their  value.  What  does  he,  as  a  sensible  man,  do?  Why,  he  adds  that  extra 
amount  to  the  amount  of  interest  that  the  borrower  will  have  to  pay  him  ; 
and  in  this  case  you  are  the  borrower,  and  you  surely  see  that  you  have  to 
pay  the  tax  on  that  mortgage.  But  say  you  are  dealing  with  a  man  who 
dodges  his  taxes.  Then  where  are  you  ?  He  has  got  the  money  from  you 
to  pay  the  taxes  on  his  mortgage,  but  he  and  God  are  the  only  two  who 
know  whether  the  State  of  New  York  gets  the  money  that  he  collected  from 
you  to  pay  the  tax  on  his  mortgage.  The  chances  are  that  he  and  God  are 
in  receipt  of  better  information,  for  it  is  a  hundred  to  one  that  he  keeps 
that  money  in  his  pocket  and  puts  the  mortgage  where  the  assessor  cannot 
find  it;  the  result  being  that  you  have  to  pay  a  higher  rate  of  interest  than 
you  would  otherwise  have  to  pay,  and  he  is  gainer  to  the  extent  that  a  bad 
law  has  permitted  him  to  blackmail  you  for  his  own  individual  benefit. 

J.:  But  in  addition  to  the  interest  I  have  to  pay  the  man  who  holds 
the  mortgage  on  my  place,  I  have  to  pay  taxes  spring  and  fall  on  the  value 
of  my  property,  of  which  this  money  lender  practically  owns  three-fourths. 

T.  R.:  Well,  if  you  have  to  pay  taxes  on  this  property  spring  and  fall, 
and  also  have  to  pay  to  this  man  interest  on  your  mortgage,  don't  you  see 
that  your  property  under  our  personal  property  tax  laws  is  being  taxed,  so 
far  as  you  are  concerned,  once  on  its  full  value  and  again  on  three-fourths 
of  its  value  ? 
•  J. :  No  ;  I  don't  see  that. 

T.  R. :  Let  me  try  to  prove  it.  You  have  to  pay  your  taxes,  as  you  say, 
spring  and  fall  on  your  land.  You  are  sure  to  have  to  do  that,  for  the 
assessor  knows  that  that  land  lies  out  of  doors  where  he  and  your  neighbors 
can  see  it,  and  for  this  reason  you  are  not  able  to  dodge  your  tax.  Therein 
lies  the  difference  between  you  and  the  man  who  took  the  mortgage  on  your 
place.  He  can  hide  his  taxable  property,  which  in  this  case  is  the  mort- 
gage that  he  holds  on  your  place,  and  he  does  hide  it,  and  there  is  not  a 
listing  bill  prepared,  and  none  ever  can  be  prepared,  strong  enough  to  com- 
pel that  man  to  pay  taxes  on  that  mortgage  if  he  does  not  wish  to  do  so. 
Further,  the  personal  property  tax  hampers  you.  It  has,  as  you  have 
already  seen,  hampered  you  so  far  as  your  mortgage  is  concerned.  It  ham- 
pers you  still  further  by  preventing  you  from  putting  your  land  to  its  best 
productive  use. 

J. :  WTell,  Mr.  Tax  Reformer,  I  don't  see  that.  That  is  the  point  I  wish 
you  to  explain. 

T.  R. :  It  seems  quite  clear  to  me.  A  tax  on  anything  increases  its  price 
to  the  last  purchaser,  or  what  is  more  properly  known  as  the  consumer,  and 


APPENDIX. 


199 


makes  it  compulsory  on  him  to  get  along  with  less  of  the  things  that  are 
produced.  Suppose,  for  instance,  that  you  raise  hogs,  and  that  there  is  a 
personal  property  tax  of  one  cent  a  pound  on  hogs.  Don't  you  see  that  the 
price  at  which  you  could  profitably  raise  hogs  would  be  increased  one  cent 
a  pound,  and  that  as  that  hog  passes  from  hand  to  hand  on  its  way  to  the 
consumer,  each  adding  his  profit,  by  the  time  it  has  reached  the  consumer 
all  the  profits  on  that  one  cent  a  pound  have  grown  so  as  to  make  a  material 
difference  in  the  price  of  hog  meat?  And  don't  you  see,  further,  that  the 
effect  of  that  will  be  to  compel  the  consumer  to  get  along  with  less  hog  meat 
than  he  would  otherwise  use,  with  the  result  that  the  consumers  curtail 
the  amount  of  hog  meat  that  they  would  ordinarily  buy,  that  there  would 
be  less  demand  made  on  you  to  raise  hogs,  that  there  would  be  less  of  your 
labor  required  in  the  raising  of  hogs,  and,  finally,  that  the  result  of  all  this 
would  be  hard  times  for  you  ;  for,  as  the  demand  for  hogs  decreased,  the 
production  would  be  decreased  and  there  would  be  less  demand  for  your 
labor? 

J.  :  Yes  ;  I  partly  see  it.  The  idea  you  mean  to  convey  is  that  the 
cheaper  products  are,  the  more  of  them  people  can  afford  to  buy,  and  that 
as  their  demands  increase  the  demand  for  my  labor  would  increase.  Is  that 
it? 

T.  R.  :  That's  it.  There  is  an  injustice  being  done  you  under  the  pres- 
ent system  of  taxation,  which  I  think  you  feel.  But  you  must  not  attempt 
to  relieve  yourself  of  injustice  by  piling  it  on  the  shoulders  of  others  who 
now  carry  as  heavy  a  burden  as  they  can  bear.  If  you  think  you  are  going 
to  ease  yourself  of  your  burdens  by  pounding  the  holder  of  your  mortgage 
in  the  vain  hope  of  making  him  pay  more  taxes,  you  are  making  a  grave 
mistake.  The  thing  that  you,  and  all  men  engaged  in  productive  industry, 
have  got  to  turn  your  attention  to,  is  the  levying  of  taxes  with  some  idea  as 
to  justice.  I,  as  a  tax  reformer,  want  taxes  taken  off  industry  and  placed 
on  the  thing  that  industry  and  population  give  value  to,  and  that  is  real 
estate.  There  is  real  estate  in  your  town,  and  there  is  real  estate  out  on  the 
Western  plains.  The  real  estate  in  your  town  is  worth  some  dollars  per 
foot,  while  the  real  estate  that  I  speak  of  out  on  the  plains  is  not  worth  a 
cent  a  square  yard.  Why  is  it  that  the  real  estate  in  your  town  has  a  value, 
and  the  real  estate  out  on  the  plains  has  none  ?  It  is  simply  because  in 
your  town  there  is  population  and  personal  property,  while  on  this  square 
yard  in  the  West  there  is  nothing  :  so,  what  is  it  that  gives  value  to  real 
estate  ? 

I  do  not  wish  you  any  harm,  but  I  am  rather  glad  that  there  is  a  mort- 
gage hanging  over  your  property.  Had  there  not  been,  the  probabilities  are 


2oo  WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

that  you  would  never  have  thought  about  this  question  of  taxation.  If  the 
$1,500  mortgage  has  done  nothing  else,  it  has  aroused  you  into  taking  an 
active  interest  in  taxation.  I  advise  you  to  study  the  question,  and  not  be 
led  away  by  any  of  the  demagogic  talk  that  is  indulged  in  throughout  the 
suburban  districts.  WILLIAM  McCABE. 

A   BUSINESS   MAN   ANSWERED. 

This  association  recently  had  some  correspondence  with  a  business  man 
of  New  York  City  upon  the  question  of  his  aiding  the  movement  in  favor  of 
abolishing  taxes  upon  personal  property.  In  answer  to  a  communication 
from  him  urging  the  uselessness  of  the  work  in  which  we  are  engaged,  the 
following  letter  was  written  : 

Mr.  LITTLE-THOUGHT,  No.  IOOT  Maiden  Lane,  New  York. 

Dear  Sir  ;  Your  skepticism  regarding  the  probable  action  of  the  legisla- 
ture is  the  result  of  a  lack  of  knowledge  of  the  facts.  Many  of  the  country 
papers,  printed  in  the  farming  interest,  cannot  be  more  urgent  than  they  are 
in  insisting  on  more  rigorous  laws  for  the  collection  of  personal  property 
taxes.  I  cannot  lay  the  matter  before  you  in  a  letter,  but  we  have  in  this 
office  hundreds  of  columns  of  matter  printed  in  the  farming  press  in  favor 
of  the  enactment  of  personal  property  tax  laws,  especially  directed  against 
what  they  style  the  "  money  sharks"  of  New  York  City. 

You  may  be  right  in  your  opinion  concerning  our  city  legislators.  They 
have  been  bribed  and  will  be  bribed  again  ;  but  there  is  no  politician  or 
office-holder  living  who  will  dare,  for  a  bribe,  to  vote  against  what  comes  to 
him  clearly  and  distinctly  as  an  expression  of  opinion  from  the  people.  I 
think  it  is  the  fault  of  business  men  with  large  interests,  that  most  of  our 
politicians  are  corrupt.  The  condition  may  be  bad,  but  the  average  busi- 
ness man  who  understands  the  condition  would  rather  submit  to  it  than 
advocate  or  take  on  another  condition  which  he  knows  not  of.  Politicians 
are  shrewd  men,  and  they  know  this,  and  they  also  know  how  sensitive  a 
dollar  is,  and  upon  these  two  things  they  play,  and  they  milk  the  business 
men,  year  after  year,  just  as  a  dairy-maid  milks  a  cow. 

You,  like  other  business  men,  have  no  money  to  "  throw  away"  on  what 
you  may  consider  to  be  a  forlorn  hope.  You  prefer  to  wait  until  the  thing 
comes  upon  you  in  such  monstrous  shape  that  all  the  money  that  can  be  got 
together  will  not  clear  it  away.  The  men  composing  this  association  are 
many  of  the  largest  wholesale  and  retail  business  men  of  this  city.  They 
see  the  danger  and  they  desire  to  meet  it  ;  but  they  very  naturally  think  that 
the  success  of  this  association  means  benefit  to  all  men  in  business.  There- 


APPENDIX.  261 

fore,  they  think  the  business  men  of  this  city  should  join  with  them  in  trying 
to  defeat  the  contemplated  legislation  at  Albany. 

I  have  called  on  several  business  men  in  this  city  in  connection  with  this 
matter,  but  I  find  that  they  are  too  busy  to  spare  time  for  argument.  I  do 
not  think  any  good  is  to  be  done  by  calling.  The  only  thing  for  you  to  do 
is  to  devote  some  of  your  spare  time  to  an  examination  of  this  question  and 
of  the  probable  action  at  Albany  this  winter,  when  I  think  a  great  deal  of 
your  skepticism  will  vanish. 

Hoping  to  hear  further  from  you,  I  am, 
Yours  very  truly, 

WILLIAM  McCABE,  Assistant  Secretary, 

New  York  Tax  Reform  Association. 

MR.    FAWCETT   ON    THE   INCOME   TAX. 

"  How  is  it  possible  to  supply  any  test  or  measure  of  the  amount  which 
a  man  can  afford  to  pay  toward  a  tax?  Certainly,  such  a  test  or  measure 
is  not  provided  by  the  nature  of  the  source  from  which  an  income  may  be 
derived,  for  the  income  of  almost  every  individual  is  obtained  from  a  great 
variety  of  different  sources  ;  therefore,  some  portion  of  his  income  may  be 
permanent,  and  another  part  of  it  may  be  temporary.  Consequently  it  is 
impossible  to  judge  of  an  individual's  means  by  considering  only  one  part 
of  his  aggregate  income.  Thus  A  may  possess  £2,000  a  year  in  landed 
property,  and  may,  in  addition  to  this,  derive  ,£1,000  a  year  from  his  profes- 
sion. Another  individual,  B,  may  possess  only  ^500  a  year  in  landed 
property,  but  has  a  permanent  income  of  ^1,000  a  year  from  the  funds. 
On  what  ground  do  those  who  oppose  a  uniform  income  tax  affirm  that  the 
;£i,ooo  a  year  which  B  obtains  from  the  funds  should  be  taxed  at  a  higher 
rate  than  the^"i,ooo  a  year  which  A  is  supposed  to  realize  from  his  profes- 
sion ?  B  is  a  much  poorer  man  than  A,  and  it  therefore  cannot  be  main- 
tained that  B,  with  regard  to  a  portion  of  his  income,  should  be  taxed  at  a 
higher  rate  than  A,  because  the  former  can  better  afford  to  contribute  to 
the  tax  than  the  latter." 

Mr.  Fawcett  urges  as  one  of  the  strongest  arguments  against  an  income 
tax  that  it  is  often  a  tax  upon  savings,  and  therefore  discourages  prudence. 
He  argues  against  a  graduated  income  tax,  that  it  would  be  virtually  sanc- 
tioning the  principle  that  the  proportion  which  the  State  should  take  from 
a  man's  income  should  increase  in  the  direct  ratio  of  the  amount  he  might 
save.  A  tax  levied  on  this  principle  discourages  the  accumulation  of  capi- 
tal, and  thus  tends  to  discourage  the  creation  of  new  industries  and  the 


202  WHO   PAYS   YOUR    TAXES? 

extension  of  those  already  in  existence.  Mr.  Fawcett  is  of  opinion  that  the 
effects  of  the  income  tax  in  Great  Britain  are  not  so  important  as  has  been 
supposed,  but  he  believes  that  the  tax  bears  with  peculiar  hardship  upon 
such  small  incomes  as  fall  within  the  law.  "  For  instance,"  says  he,  "an 
income  just  exceeding  ^400  is  taxed  at  the  same  rate  as  an  income  of 
£10,000.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  owner  of  such  a  small  income  as 
,£400  cannot  pay  even  a  few  pounds  toward  an  income  tax  without  depriv- 
ing himself  or  his  family  of  the  means  of  satisfying  some  real  want  or 
enjoyment  of  life.  The  income  tax,  therefore,  entails  a  far  greater  sacrifice 
upon  such  a  person  than  upon  the  more  wealthy  man,  who  can  pay  the  tax 
without  encroaching  upon  his  personal  expenditure." 

After  discussing  various  schemes  for  adjusting  an  income  tax  in  such 
manner  as  to  avoid  such  inequalities,  Mr.  Fawcett  says  :  "In  conclusion,  it 
is  necessary  to  refer  to  a  serious  objection  connected  with  the  income  tax, 
which  cannot  be  obviated  by  any  method  of  adjustment.  It  is  evident  that 
the  tax  can  be  accurately  levied  upon  all  incomes  the  amounts  of  which  are 
publicly  known.  As  previously  stated,  the  Bank  of  England,  when  paying 
the  dividends  arising  from  the  funds,  deducts  the  income  tax,  and  hands  the 
amount  over  to  the  Government.  The  tax  is  similarly  deducted  from  all 
official  salaries,  and  also  from  the  pay  of  officers  in  the  army  and  navy.1 
The  amount  of  the  tax  which  is  levied  from  various  other  kinds  of  incomes 
is  also  regulated  by  definite  rules.  For  instance,  a  farmer's  income  is  esti- 
mated to  be  equivalent  to  one-half  his  rent.  If, 'therefore,  his  rent  is  ^800 
a  year,  and  if  the  income  tax  is  five  per  cent.,  the  income  tax  levied  upon 
him  will  be  £20.  His  income  may  no  doubt  be  either  more  or  less  than 
^"400  a  year  ;  but  when  the  rule  has  once  been  made,  he  has  no  power  to 
evade  any  portion  of  the  tax,  because  the  amount  at  which  he  is  assessed  is 
precisely  determined.  But  with  regard  to  various  other  classes  of  traders 
it  is  impossible  to  ascertain  the  amount  of  their  incomes  by  any  definite  rules. 
The  income  of  a  manufacturer  or  retail  trader  can  only  be  approximately 
estimated  ;  an  opportunity  is  thus  afforded  to  evade  a  considerable  portion 
of  the  tax.  Morality  is  unfortunately  too  often  based  on  conventionality  ; 
and  many  who  pass  for  honest  men  do  not  hesitate  to  cheat  the  Government, 
although  in  the  private  transactions  of  life  they  would  shrink  from  doing 
anything  in  the  least  degree  dishonorable.  Numerous  cases  have  occurred 
which  strikingly  exemplify  the  dishonesty  that  is  practiced  by  many  in  their 
dealings  with  the  Government." — Manual  of  Political  Economy.  By  the 


1  These  are  ludicrous  instances  of  taking  out  of  one  pocket  to  put  into  the  other. 
Why  not  pay  less  salaries  or  interest,  and  make  them  free  of  taxes?— ED. 


APPENDIX.  26$ 

Right   Hon.    Henry  Fawcett,   M.  P.,  D.  C.  L.,  F.  R.  S.,  etc.,  etc       Sixth 
edition.      London  :  Macmillan  &  Co.,  1883.     Book  IV.,  Chap.  II. 

The  lists  of  newspapers,  and  of  professors  of  political  economy  in  our 
colleges,-  with  their  attitudes  regarding  the  questions  of  taxation,  cannot  fail 
to  be  of  interest  in  future  years  as  a  gauge  of  the  state  of  public  opinion 
in  1892. 

ATTITUDE    OF   THE   COLLEGES. 

This  association  recently  communicated  with  the  presidents  or  professors 
of  political  science  of  all  the  colleges  and  universities  of  the  United  States, 
with  a  view  to  ascertaining  their  opinions  on  its  platform.  There  have  been 
104  responses  to  our  letter,  of  which  85  are  favorable,  36  unfavorable,  and 
45  non-committal.  These  gentlemen  were  favorable  : 

Rev.  A.  S.  Andrews,  D.D.,  Pres.  Southern  Univ.,  Greensborough Ala. 

"     E.  Benj.  Andrews,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  Pres.  Brown  Univ.,  Providence R.  I. 

Prof.  James  Atkins,  Emory  and  Henry  Coll.,  Emory Va. 

Rev.  R.  L.  Abernethy,  D.D.,  Pres.  Rutherford  Coll.,  Rutherford N.  C. 

Prof.  J.  William  Black,  Georgetown  Coll. ,  Georgetown Ky. 

"     Andrew  Baepler,  Pres.  Concordia  Coll.,  Fort  Wayne  Ind. 

"     Edw.  W.  Bemis,  of  Economy  and  History,  Vanderbilt  Univ.,  Nashville Tenn. 

Hon.  Kemp  P.  Battle,  LL.D.,  Pres.  Univ.  of  North  Carolina,  Chapel  Hill N.  C. 

Prof.  Charles  E.  Bessey,  Ph.D.,  Univ.  of  Nebraska,  Lincoln Neb. 

Rev.  J.  W.  Bissell,  Pres.  Upper  Iowa  Univ.,  Fayette la. 

Prof.  Chas.  A.  Blanchard,  M.A.,  Pres.  Wheaton  Coll.,  Wheaton 111. 

"     W.  M.  Brooks,  A.M.,  Pres.  Tabor  Coll.,  Tabor la. 

"     T.  G.  Brownson,  Pres.  McMinnville  Coll.,  McMinnville Ore. 

Rev.  J.  H.  Brunner,  D.D.,  Pres.  Hiwassee  Coll.,  Hiwassee Tenn. 

Prof.  Horace  Bumstead.  D.D.,  Pres.  Atlanta  Univ.,  Atlanta Ga. 

Rev.  S.  W.  Boardman,  D.D.,  Pres.  Maryville  Coll.,  Maryville Tenn. 

Prof,  E.  H.  Capen,  D.D.,  Pres.  Tufts  Coll.,  College  Hill Mass. 

41     James  H.  Carlisle,  LL.D.,  Pres.  Wofford  Coll.,  Spartanburgh S.  C. 

"     Franklin  Carter,  Ph.D.,  LL.D.,  Pres.  Williams  Coll.,  Williamstown Mass. 

"     D.  H.  Cochran,  Ph.D.,  LL.D.,  Pres.  Polytechnic  Inst.,  Brooklyn N.  Y. 

"     B.  D.  Cockrill,  Trinity  Univ.,  Tehuacana Tex. 

"     John  F.  Crowell,  A.M.,  Pres.  Trinity  Coll.,  Trinity N.  C. 

"     Winthrop  More  Daniels,  department  Economics,  Wesleyan  Univ.,  Middle- 
town     Conn. 

•'     Edw.  C.  Downing,  Secy.  Faculty,  Macalaster  Coll.,  Macalaster Minn. 

"     Julius  D.  Dreher,  A.M.,  Ph.D.,  Pres.  Roanoke  Coll.,  Salem Va. 

"      Chas.  W.  Eliot,  LL.D.,  Pres.  Harvard  Univ.,  Cambridge Mass. 

"     D.  W.  Fisher,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  Pres.  Hanover  Coll.,  Hanover Ind, 

"     Wm.  W.  Folwell,  of  Political  Science,  Univ.  of  Minnesota,  Minneapolis. .  .Minn. 

"     E.  S.  Frisbee,  D.D.,  Pres.  Wells  Coll.,  Aurora N.  Y. 

**     H.  T.  Fuller,  Pres.  Worcester  Polytechnic  Inst.,  Worcester Mass. 


204  WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

Rev.  Geo.  A.  Gates,  A.M.,  Pres.  Iowa  Coll.,  Grinnell la. 

Prof.  Clarence  Gordon,  Newburg N.  Y. 

"     W.  M.  Grier,  D.D.,  Pres.  Erskine  Coll.,  Due  West S.  C. 

"     W.  M.  Hall,  of  Political  Science,  Colorado  Coll.,  Colorado  Springs Col. 

44     A.M.  Haggard,  A.M.,  Pres.  Oskaloosa  Coll.,  Oskaloosa la. 

"      A.  B.  Harvey,  A.B.,  Pres.  Benzonia  Coll.,  Benzonia Mich. 

44     A.  B.  Hervey,  St.  Lawrence  Univ.,  Canton N.  Y. 

"     John  A.  Himes,  of  Political  Science,  Pennsylvania  State  Coll.,  Gettysburg. . .  Pa. 

11     William  P.  Holcorab,  of  Political  Economy,  Swarthmore  Coll.,  Swarthmore..Pa. 

"     W.  J.  Holland,  Ph.D.,  D.D.,  Chan.  Western  Univ.  of  Pennsylvania,  Alle- 

ghany Pa. 

"      Fred.  G.  Holmes,  of  History  and  Science,  Univ.  of  Virginia,  Albemarle  Co. .  .Va. 

Rev.  E.  P.  Hooker,  D.D.,  Pres.  Collins  Coll.,  Winter  Park Fla. 

Prof.  Ellery  C.  Huntington,  Univ.  of  Nashville Tenn. 

44     F.  T.  Ingalls,  D.D.,  Pres.  Drury  Coll.,  Springfield Miss. 

44     John  D.  Irons,  D.D.,  Pres.  Muskingum  Coll.,  New  Concord Ohio 

11     S.  A.  Jones,  LL.D.,  Pres.  Nevada  State  Univ.,  Reno .  Nev. 

44      David  S.  Jordan,  Pres.  Leland  Stanford,  Jr.,  Univ.,  Palo  Alto Cal. 

Rt.  Rev.  J.  J.  Keane,  Rector  Catholic  Univ.  of  America,  Washington D.  C. 

Rev.  A.  A.  Kendrick,  D.D.,  Pres.  Shurtleff  Coll.,  Upper  Alton 111. 

Prof.  Wm.  F.  King,  LL.D.,  Pres.  Cornell  Coll.,  Mt.  Vernon la. 

44      H.  T.  Ludwig,  North  Carolina  Coll.,  Mt.  Pleasant .  N.  C. 

'     J.  Macy,  of  Political  Economy,  Iowa  Coll.,  Grinnell la. 

Rev.  T.  P.  Marsh,  D.D.,  Pres.  Mount  Union  Coll.,  Alliance Ohio. 

Prof.  H.  MacCracken,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  Chan.  Univ.  City  of  N.  Y  N.  Y.  City. 

Rev.  Wm.  F.  McDowell,  A.M.,  S.T.B.,  Univ.  of  Denver,  Denver  Col. 

11    Geo.  B.  McElroy,  D.D.,  Ph.D.,  F.S.,  Adrian  Coll.,  Adrian Mich. 

44    Archibald  McLean,  Pres.  Bethany  Coll.,  Bethany W.  Va. 

Prof.  Chas.  A.  Mead,  A. B.,  Teacher,  Dearborn-Morgan  School,  Orange N.  J. 

44      H.  W.  M.illigan,  Department  of  History,  Literature  and  Economics,  Illinois 

Coll.,  Jacksonville 111. 

44     Geo.  F.  Mosher,  Hillsdalc  Coll.,  Hillsdale Mich. 

44     Geo.  B.  Newcomb,  of  Moral  Philosophy,  Coll.  of  City  of  N.  Y N.  Y.  City. 

Hon.  Geo.  Nichols,  M.D.,  LL.D.,  Acting-Pres.  Norwich  Univ.,  Northfield Vt. 

Prof.  Wm.  A.  Obenchain,  A.M.,  Pres.  Ogden  Coll.,  Bowling  Green Ky. 

Rev.  Alfred  Owen,  D.D.,  Pres.  Roger  Williams  Univ.,  Nashville Tenn. 

Prof.  John  R.  Park,  M.D.,  Pres.  Univ.  of  Deseret,  Salt  Lake  City Utah. 

'4     J.  B.  Parkinson,  of  Political  Economy,  Univ.  of  Wisconsin,  Madison Wis. 

Rev.  W.  A.  Quayle,  A.M.,  Pres.  Baker  Univ.,  Baldwin Kan. 

Prof.  Geo.  E.  Reed,  D.D.,  Pres.  Dickinson  Coll.,  Carlisle Pa. 

14      Jas.  Reid,  Pre?.  Coll.  of  Montana,  Deer  Lodge Mont. 

Rev.  B.  F.  Riley,  D.D.,  Pres.  Howard  Coll.,  Birmingham Ala. 

44    Wm.  C.  Roberts,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  Pres.  Lake  Forest  Univ.,  Lake  Forest 111. 

Prof.  Henry  W.  Rogers,  LL.D.,  Pres.  Northwestern  Univ.,  Evanston 111. 

Rev.  W.  S.  Ryland,  Chair  of  Faculty,  Bethel  Coll.,  Russellville Ky. 

Prof.  Austin  Scott,  Ph.D.,  LL.D.,  Pres.  Queens  Coll.,  Rutgers  Coll.,  New  Bruns- 
wick  N.J. 

Rev.  Chas.  Scott,  D.D.,  Pres.  Hope  Coll.,  Holland  Mich. 

"    L.  Clark  Seelye,  D.D.,  Pres.  Smith  Coll.,  Northampton Mass. 

Prof.  Edwin  R.  Seligman,  of  Political  Economy,  Columbia  Coll N.  Y.  City. 


APPENDIX. 


205 


Prof.  H.  E.  Shepherd,  LL.D.,  Pres.  Coll.  of  Charleston,  Charleston S.  C. 

"     S.  E.  Shocks,  Ashland  Coll.,  Ashland  Ohio. 

"    Chas.  N.  Sims,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  Chan.  Syracuse  Univ.,  Syracuse N.  Y. 

Rev.  Ambrose  C.  Smith,  D.D.,  Pres.  Parsons  Coll.,  Fairneld, la. 

Prof.  J .  A.  Smith,  Pres.  Nebraska  Central  Coll.,  Central  City Neb. 

"    Wm.  W.  Smith,  A.M.,  Pres.  Randolph- Macon  Coll.,  Ashland Va. 

"    J.  W.  Strong,  D.D.,  Pres.  Carleton  Coll.,  Northfield Minn. 

"    Charles  W.  Super,  A.M.,  Ph.D.,  Pres.  Ohio  Univ.,  Athens  Ohio. 

"    A.  H.  Tolman,  of  Political  Economy,  Ripon  Coll.,  Ripon Wis. 

41    W.  P.  Trent,  of  English  and  History,  Univ.  of  the  South,  Sewanee Tenn. 

u     R.  E.  Thompson,  Univ.  of  Pennsylvania,  Philadelphia Pa. 

"    A.  E.  Turner,  A.M.,  Pres.  Lincoln  Univ.,  Lincoln 111. 

"    E.  M.  Turner,  A.M.,  LL.D.,  Pres.  W.  Va.  Univ.,  Morgantown West  Va. 

"    Lyon  G.  Tyler,  A.M.,  Pres.  Coll.  of  William  and  Mary,  Williamsburg Va. 

Rev.  Thomas  Van  Scoy,  D.D.,  Pres.  Willamette  Coll.,  Portland Ore. 

"     Wm.  F.  Warren,  S.T.D.,  LL.D.,  Pres.  Boston  Univ.,  Boston Mass. 

"    John  Washburn,  D.D.,  Pres.  Ewing  College 111. 

Prof.  H.  E.  Webster,  LL.D.,  Pres.  Union  Coll.,  Schenectady N.  Y. 

"    J.  A.  Weller,  Pres.  Central  College,  Enterprise  Kansas. 

Hon.  David  A.  Wells,  Norwich Conn. 

Prof.  D.  Collins  Wells,  of  Political  Science  and  History,  Bowdoin  Coll.,  Bruns- 
wick  Me. 

"    James  C.  Welling,  LL.D.,  Pres.  Columbian  Univ.,  Washington D.  C. 

"     D.  H.  Wheeler,  LL.D.,  Pres.  Alleghany  Coll.,  Meadville Pa. 

Rev.  N.  White,  LL.D.,  Pres.  Lombard  Univ..  Galesburg 111. 

"    George  W.  Williard,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  Pres.  Heidelberg  Coll.,  Tiffin Ohio. 

Prof.  Woodrow  Wilson,  of  Political  Economy,  Coll.  of  New  Jersey,  Princeton  ...N.  J. 
Rev.  William  C.  Young,  D.D.,  Pres.  Centre  Coll.,  Danville Ky. 

These  wrote  expressing  unfavorable  opinions: 

Rev.  George  H.  Ball,  Pres.  KeukaColl.,  Penn  Yan N.  Y. 

"  J.  W.  Bashford,  Ph.D.,  Pres.  Ohio  Wesleyan  Univ.,  Delaware Ohio. 

Hon.  Newton  Bateham,  LL.D.,  Pres.  Knox  College,  Galesburg 111. 

Rev.  William  M.  Blackburn,  D.D.,  Pierre  Univ.,  East  Pierre So.  Dak. 

Prof.  Ezra  Brainerd,  LL.D.,  Pres.  Middlebury  Coll.,  Middlebury Vt. 

Rev.  George  T.  Carpenter,  M.  A.,  Chan.  Drake  Univ.,  Des  Moines la. 

Prof.  Katharine  Cowan,  Pres.  Wellesley  Coll.,  Wellesley Mass. 

Rev.  O.  Cone,  D.D.,  Pres.  Buchtel  Coll.,  Akron Ohio. 

Prof.  Richard  T.  Ely,  Johns  Hopkins  Univ.,  Baltimore Md. 

"  N.  Green,  LL.D.,  Chan.  Cumberland  Un;v.,  Lebanon Tenn. 

Rev.  T.  A.  Hardman,  D.D.,  Pres.  McKendrce  Coll.,  Lebanon 111. 

Prof.  H.  M.  Hale,  A.M.,  LL.D.,  Pres.  Univ.  of  Colorado,  Boulder Coll. 

"    E.  M.  James,  Am.  Academy,  Pol.  and  Social  Science,  Stat.  B,  Phila Pa. 

"  J.  M.  Leavitt,  A.M.,  Ph.D.,  Pres.  Southwestern  Baptist  Coll.,  Bolivar Mo. 

Rev.  Richard  Mcllwaine,  D.D..  Pres.  Hampden-Sidney  Coll.,  Hampden-Sidney...Va. 

"  J.  B.  McMichael,  D.D.,  Pres.  Monmouth  Coll.,  Monmouth III. 

Prof.  J.  D.  Moffat,  Washington  and  Jefferson  Coll.,  Washington Pa. 

"  James  Monroe,  of  Political  Science,  Oberlin  Coll,  Oberlin Ohio. 

Rev.  W.  A.  Montgomery,  D.D.,  Pres.  Carson  and  Newman  Coll.,  Mossy  Creek.Tenn. 


2o6  WHO  PAYS  YOUR   TAXES? 

Rev.  Thomas  E.  Peden,  Pres.  West  Virginia  Coll.,  Flemington W.  Va. 

Prof.  B.  Puryeer,  LL.D.,  Pres.  Richmond  Coll.,  Richmond Va. 

"    J.  A.  Quarles,  Washington  and  Lee  Univ.,  Lexington Va. 

"  James  E.  Rhoads,  LL.D.,  Pres.  Bryn  Mawr  Coll.,  Bryn  Mawr Pa. 

Rev.  J.  H.  Richard,  S.J.,  Pres.  Georgetown  Coll.,  Washington D.  C. 

Prof.  A.  E.  Rogers,  State  Coll.  of  Agriculture,  Orono Me. 

"    J.  G.  Sheperd,  Attica N.  Y. 

"    Chas.  Lee  Smith,  of  History  and  Politics,  William  Jewell  Coll.,  Liberty  Mo. 

"    Albion  W.  Small,  Colby  Univ.,  Waterville Me. 

"  J.  P.  Stephenson,  A.M.,  Univ.  of  Des  Moines,  Des  Moines la. 

Rev.  William  T.  Stott,  D.D.,  Pres.  Franklin  Coll.,  Franklin Ind. 

Prof.  John  S.  Stahr,  Pres.  Franklin  and  Marshall  Coll.,  Lancaster Pa. 

Rev.  George  Sutherland,  A.M.,  Pres.  Ottawa  Univ.,  Ottawa Kan. 

Prof.  J.  B.  Unthank,  M.Sc.,  Pres.  Wilmington  Coll.,  Wilmington Ohio. 

"    E.  D.  Warfield,  of  Political  Economy,  Lafayette  Coll.,  Easton  Pa. 

"  James  Riley  Weaver,  Prof.  Political  Science,  De  Pauw  Univ.,  Greencastle . .  .Ind. 
Rev.  W.  H.  Wilder,  D.D.,  Pres.  111.  Wesleyan  Univ.,  Bloomiston 111. 


These  were  non-committal  in  their  replies  : 

Prof.  Chas.  K.  Adams,  LL.D.,  Pres.  Cornell  Univ.,  Ithaca N.  Y. 

"  Geo.  W.  Atherton,  LL.D.,  Pres.  Pennsylvania  State  Coll.,  State  College Pa. 

Rev.  J.  W.  Bissell,  LL.D.,  Pres.  Upper  Iowa  Univ.,  Fayette la. 

Prot.  F.  W.  Blackman,  of  History  and  Sociology,  Univ.  of  Kansas,  Lawrence. . .  Kan 

Rev.  M.  H.  Buckham,  D.D.,  Pres.  Univ.  of  Vermont,  Burlington Vt. 

Prof.  W.  S.  Carrell,  of  Political  Economy,  Davidson  Coll.,  Davidson N.  C. 

Rev.  W.  A.  Candler,  D.D.,  Pres.  Emory  Coll.,  Oxford Ga. 

"    E.  M.  Cravath,  D.D.,  Pres.  Fisk  Univ.,  Nashville Tenn. 

11  Holmes  Dysinger,  S.M.,  Pres.  Carthage  Coll.,  Carthage 111. 

Hon.  John  Eaton,  Ph.D.,  LL.D.,  Pres.  Marietta  Coll.,  Marietta Ohio. 

Rev.  Henry  Ferguson,  Trinity  Coll.,  Hartford Conn. 

Prof.  D.  C.  Gilman,  LL.D.,  Pres.  Johns  Hopkins  Univ.,  Baltimore Md. 

"    Arthur  T.  Hadley,  Yale  Coll.,  New  Haven Conn. 

"  G.  Stanley  Hall,  Clark  Univ.,  Worcester Mass. 

Rev.  F.  H.  M.  Henderson,  D.D.,  Pres.  Bowdan  Coll.,  Bowdan Ga. 

"  W.  L.  C.  Hunnicut,  D.D.,  Pres.  Centenary  Coll.,  Jackson La. 

Prof.  Huntington,  Univ.  of  Nashville,  Nashville Tenn. 

"  R.  H.  Jesse,  Pres.  Univ.  of  State  of  Missouri,  Columbia Mo. 

Rev.  William  P.  Johnston,  A.M.,  Pres.  Geneva  Coll.,  Beaver  Falls Pa. 

Prof.  M.  Kellogg,  Acting  Pres.  Univ.  of  California,  Berkeley Cal. 

Rev.  T.  J.  Kennedy,  D.D.,  F.  S.,  Pres.  Amity  Coll.,  College  Springs la. 

Prof.  E.  S.  Lewis,  Grant  Memorial  Univ.,  Chattanooga  Tenn. 

Rev.  Wm.  F.  McDowell,  A.M.,  S.T.B.,  Chan.  Univ.  of  Denver,  Denver Col. 

Prof.  J.  W.  Mauck,  M.A.,  Pres.  Univ.  S.  Dakota,  Vermilion So.  Dak. 

11  J.  M.  McBride,  Univ.  of  South  Carolina,  Columbia So.  Car. 

Rev.  Peter  McVicar,  D.D.,  Pres.  Washburn  Coll.,  Topeka Kan. 

Prof.  Thomas  Mason,  D.D.,  Pres.  Philander  Smith  Coll.,  Little  Rock Ark. 

"  Henry  Morton,  Ph.D.,  LL.D.,  Pres.  Stevens  Inst.  of  Technology,  Hoboken,  N.  J. 
Rev.  Francis  Patton,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  Pres.  Coll.  of  New  Jersey,  Princeton N.  J, 


APPENDIX. 


207 


Rev.  E.  N.  Potter,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  Pres.  Hobart  Coll.,  Geneva N.  Y. 

President  Racine  Coll.,  Racine Wis. 

Prof.  H.  W.  Prescott,  A.M.,  Pres.  Battle  Creek  Coll.,  Battle  Creek Mich. 

"    C.  A.  Schaefer,  Ph.D.,  Pres.  State  Univ.  of  Iowa,  Iowa  City la. 

11    W.  H.  Scott,  LL.D.,  Pres.  Ohio  State  Univ.,  Columbus Ohio. 

Rev.  Sylvester  F.  Scovel,  Pres.  Univ.  of  Wooster,  Wooster Ohio. 

Prof.  Isaac  Sharpless,  Sc.D.,  Pres.  Haverford  Coll.,  Haverford Pa. 

W.B.  Sherrill,  Bethel  Coll.,  McKenzie Tenn. 

Rev.  George  W.  Smith,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  Pres.  Trinity  Coll.,  Hartford Conn. 

Prof.  Homer  B.  Sprague,  Ph.D.,  Pres.  Peralta  Hall,  Berkeley Cal. 

Rev.  J.  M.  Taylor,  D.D.,  Pres.  Vassar  Coll.,  Poughkeepsie-. N.  Y. 

Prof.  Charles  F.  Thwing,  Western  Reserve  Univ.,  Cleveland Ohio. 

"    R.  E.  Thompson,  Univ.  of  Pennsylvania.  Philadelphia Pa. 

Rev.  Chas.  E.  Van  Norden,  D.D.,  Pres.  Elmira  Coll.,  Elmira N.  Y. 

E.  B.  Wakefield,  Prof.  Political  Science,  Hiram  Coll.,  Hiram Ohio. 

Prof.  Francis  A.  Walker,  Ph.D.,  LL.D.,  Pres.  Massachusetts  Inst.  of  Technology, 

Boston Mass. 

Rev.  E.  V.  Zollars,  A.M.,  Pres.  Hiram  Coll.,  Hiram  ..  .  ..Ohio. 


ATTITUDE   OF    THE    PRESS. 

These  newspapers  have  expressed  favorable  opinions  as  to  the  views  and 
aims  of  the  association. 

Albion  (Orleans  Co.),  Herald,  Weekly,  Ind. 

Auburn  (Cayuga  Co.),  Independent,  Weekly,  Ind. 

Babylon  (Suffolk  Co.),  Signal,  Weekly,  Ind. 

Belmont  (Alleghany  Co.),  Genesee  Valley  Post,  Weekly,  Pro. 

Binghamton  (Broome  Co.),  Call,  Weekly,  Ind. 

Brooklyn,  Eagle,  Daily,  Ind. 

"         Laterne,  Weekly,  Ind. 

"         County  Journal,  Weekly,  Ind. 

Newsdealer  and  Stationer,  Monthly,  Neu. 
Review  and  Record,  Weekly,  Ind. 
Weekly,  Weekly,  Ind. 
Buffalo,  Courier,  Daily,  Morning,  Dem. 
"        American  Bookbinder,  Single  tax. 
"        Daily  Review,  Ind. 
"       Farmers'  Journal,  Weekly,  Neu. 

Freethinkers'  Magazine,  Monthly,  Neu. 
"       Magazine  of  Poetry,  Quarterly,  Neu. 
"       Roller  Mill,  Monthly,  Neu. 
"       Sunday  Truth,  Weekly,  Neu. 
Cohoes  (Albany  Co.),  Evening  Dispatch,  Daily,  Ind. 
Corning  (Steuben  Co.),  Democrat,  Daily,  Dem. 
Corona  (Queens  Co.),  Chronicle,  Bi-Monthly,  Neu. 
Cuba  (Alleghany  Co.),  Patriot,  Weekly,  Rep. 
Dansville  (Livingston  Co.),  Advertiser,  Weekly,  Rep. 
Dexter  (Jefferson  Co.),  Advertiser,  Semi-monthly,  Neu. 


2o8  WHO  PA  YS  YOUR  TAXES? 

Elmira  (Chemung  Co.),  Young-  Men's  Journal,  Monthly,  Neu. 

44       (Chemung  Co.),  Summary,  Weekly,  Ind. 
Fishkill  Landing  (Dutchess  Co.),  Standard,  Weekly,  Ind. 
Herkimer  (Herkimer  Co.),  Record,  Weekly,  Neu. 
Hermon  (St.  Lawrence  Co.),  Courier,  Weekly,  Rep. 
Hoosick  Falls  (Rensselaer  Co.),  Democrat,  Weekly,  Dem. 
Huntington  (Suffolk  Co.),  Bulletin,  Weekly,  Dem. 

"          (Suffolk  Co.),  Long  Islander,  Weekly,  Ind.-Rep. 
Jamaica  (Queens  Co.),  Long  Island  Democrat,  Weekly,  Dem. 
Jamestown  (Chautauqua  Co.),  Journal,  Weekly,  Rep. 
Kingston  (Ulster  Co.),  Blossom,  Monthly,  Neu. 
Lakeville  (Livingston  Co.),  Lake  Visitor,  Weekly,  Neu. 
Lansingburgh  (Rensselaer  Co.),  Times,  Weekly,  Rep. 
Long  Island  City  (Queens  Co.),  Star,  Daily,  Ind. 
Mount  Vernon  (Westchester  Co.),  Chronicle,  Semi-Weekly,  Ind. 
Newtown  (Queens  Co.),  Sun,  Weekly,  Ind. 
New  York  City,  Investigator,  Daily,  Neu. 

44       "         Post,  Daily,  Ind. 

"        u          Herald,  Daily,  Neu. 

44        "          Recorder,  Daily,  Rep. 

44        "         Sun,  Daily,  Dem. 

"        "         Times,  Daily,  Ind. 

"        "         World,  Daily,  Dem. 

*4        "          Indicator,  Daily,  Neu. 

44        "          Listy,  Daily,  Bohemian. 

44        "          Allgemeine  Vereins  Zeitung,  Weekly,  Neu. 

44        "         American  Art  Journal,  Weekly,  Neu. 

44        "         American  Hebrew,  Weekly,  Neu. 

44        "          Amerikanische  Schweizer  Zeitung,  Weekly,  Ind. 

44        "         American  Banker,  Weekly,  Neu. 

44       "         Age,  Weekly,  Rep. 

44        "         American  Carbonator,  Monthly,  Neu. 

44        "          Art  Interchange,  Monthly,  Neu. 

44        "          American  Homoeopathist,  Monthly,  Neu. 

4'        "          American  Journal  of  Railway  Appliances,  Weekly,  Neu, 

44        '4          American  Merchant,  Monthly,  Neu. 

4'        "         American  Pressman,  Monthly,  Neu. 

44        "          American  Silk  Journal,  Monthly,  Neu. 

44        4'         American  Grocer,  Weekly,  Neu. 

"        "          Amerikai  Nemzetor,  Weekly,  Ind. 

44        "          Architecture  and  Building,  Weekly,  Neu. 

44        "         Birds  and  Blossoms,  Monthly,  Neu. 

**        "         Blue  and  White,  Weekly,  Neu. 

44        "          Boots  and  Shoes,  Weekly,  Neu. 

44        "          Book  Chat,  Monthly,  Neu. 

44        *4          Builder  and  Woodworker,  Monthly,  Neu. 

44        "         Columbia  News,  Weekly,  Neu. 

••        4'          Commercial  Enquirer,  Weekly,  Neu. 

M        44         Capitalist,  Monthly,  Neu. 

"       44         Christian  at  Work,  Weekly,  Neu 


APPENDIX. 


New  York  City,  Christian  Weekly,  Weekly,  Neu. 

"        u  Church  Union,  Weekly,  Neu. 

"        "  Contanseau's  Bulletin,  Monthly,  Neu. 

"        "  Dry  Goods  Economist,  Weekly,  Neu. 

14        "  Dry  Goods  Chronicle,  Weekly,  Neu. 

"        "  Daheim,  Monthly,  Neu. 

"        "  Decorator  and  Furnisher,  Monthly,  Neu. 

*«        "  Eagle,  Weekly,  Neu. 

44        "  Electric  Age,  Weekly,  Neu. 

"        "  Electrical  Engineer,  Weekly,  Neu. 

"       "  El  Espejo,  Monthly,  Neu. 

"        "  Electrical  Review,  Weekly,  Neu. 

"        "  Engineering  and  Mining  Journal,  Weekly,  Neu. 

44        "  Financier,  Weekly,  Neu. 

"        "  Financial  Record,  Weekly,  Neu. 

44        "  Fancy  Goods  Graphic,  Monthly,  Neu. 

44        4'  Grand  Army  Gazette,  Monthly,  Neu. 

44        4'  Harlem  Local  Reporter,  Semi-Weekly,  Ind.-Dem 

44       "  Jewelers'  Circular,  Weekly,  Neu. 

"        "  Jewelers'  Review,  Weekly,  Neu. 

44       "  Jewelers1  Weekly,  Weekly,  Neu. 

44        "  Journal  of  Finance,  Daily,  Neu. 

44        "  Keynote,  Monthly,  Neu. 

44        "  Labor  Herald,  Weekly,  Labor. 

44        4'  Marine  Journal,  Weekly,  Neu. 

44        "  Mercantile  and  Financial  Times,  Weekly,  Neu. 

44        "  Merchants'  Review,  Weekly,  Neu. 

44        "  Manufacturer  and  Builder,  Monthly,  Neu. 

44        "  Masonic  Chronicle,  Monthly,  Neu. 

National  Standard,  Monthly,  Neu. 

44        4'  New  Earth,  Monthly,  Single  Tax. 

44        "  Nation,  Weekly,  Neu. 

4t        "  Observer,  Weekly,  Neu. 

44       "  Once  a  Week,  Weekly,  Neu. 

44        "  Old  New  York,  Monthly,  Neu. 

"  Optician,  Monthly,  Neu. 

44       "  Publishers'  Weekly,  Weekly,  Neu. 

44        "  Paper  Trade  Journal,  Weekly,  Neu. 

Phonographic  World,  Monthly,  Neu. 

Phonogram.  Monthly,  Neu. 

Pomeroy's  Advance  Thought,  Monthly,  Neu. 

44        4'  Pharmaceutical  Record,  Semi-Monthly,  Neu. 

44        "  Remedy,  Weekly,  Ballot  and  Tax  Reform. 

44        "  Review,  Weekly,  Neu. 

44        "  Railroad  Topics,  Monthly.  Neu. 

Railroad  ^nd  Engineering  Journal,  Monthly,  Neu. 

44        "  Real  Estate  Record,  Weekly,  Neu. 

44        "  Sunday  Courier,  Weekly,  Neu. 

*'        "  Shipping  and  Commercial  List,  Semi  Weekly,  Neu. 

Sunday  Times  and  Messenger,  Neu. 

14 


209 


210  WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES! 

New  York  City,  Sunnyside,  Monthly,  Neu. 

"        "          Surrogate,  Monthly,  Neu. 

"       "         Standard,  Weekly,  Single  Tax. 

"        "         Tobacco,  Weekly,  Neu. 

"        "          Tagblatt,  Weekly,  Neu. 

"        "         Town  Topics,  Weekly,  Neu. 

"       "         Truth  Seeker,  Weekly,  Neu. 

"        "         Twentieth  Century,  Weekly,  Neu. 

"        "          Uptown  Press,  Weekly,  Ind. 

"       "         United  States  Sewing  Machine  Times,  Weekly,  Neu. 
Voice,  Weekly,  Pro. 
Woman's  Illustrated  World,  Weekly,  Neu. 

"        "         Waterbury,  Monthly,  Neu. 
Nyack  (Rockland  Co.),  City  and  Country,  Weekly,  Dem. 
Port  Chester  (Westchester  Co.),  Journal,  Weekly,  Ind. 
Poughkeepsie  (Dutchess  Co.),  Eagle,  Daily,  Rep. 
Rome(Oneida  Co.),  Sentinel,  Daily,  Dem. 
Rochester  (Monroe  Co.),  Volksblatt,  Daily,  Rep. 

"  "          Farm  Life,  Monthly,  Neu. 

Jury,  Weekly,  Neu. 

"  "          Jewish  Tidings,  Weekly,  Neu. 

"  "          Odontographic  Journal,  Quarterly,  Neu. 

"  "          Post-Express,  Daily,  Ind. 

"  "          Herald,  Sunday,  Ind. 

Saratoga  (Saratoga  Co.),  Saratogan,  Daily,  Rep. 

"  "  Union,  Daily,  Ind. 

"  "  Eagle,  Weekly,  Neu. 

Sun,  Weekly,  Dem. 

Schuylerville  (Saratoga  Co.),  Standard,  Weekly,  Ind. 
Schenectady  (Schenectady  Co.),  Union,  Daily,  Rep. 
Seneca  Falls  (Seneca  Co.),  Courier,  Weekly,  Rep. 
Skaneateles  (Onondaga  Co.),  Special  Crops,  Quarterly,  Neu. 
Syracuse  "  Syracusan,  Every  Week,  Neu. 

"  "  School  Bulletin,  Monthly,  Neu. 

"  "  Industrial  Gazette,  Weekly,  Single  Tax. 

Tarrytown  (Westchester  Co.),  Record  of  the  Times,  Weekly,  Dem. 
Tonawanda  (Erie  Co.),  Herald,  Weekly,  Dem. 
Troy  (Rensselaer  Co.),  Polytechnic,  Monthly,  Neu. 

Evening  Standard,  Daily,  Ind. 
"  "  Press,  Daily,  Dem. 

Utica  (Oneida  Co.),  Observer,  Daily,  Dem. 
Watertown  (Jefferson  Co.),  Rudder,  Monthly,  Neu. 
Walden  (Orange  Co.),  Citizen,  Weekly,  Rep. 
Weedsport  (Cayuga  Co.),  Republican,  Weekly,  Ind. 
Youngstown  (Niagara  Co.),  News,  Weekly,  Ind. 

The  following  newspapers  have  expressed  themselves  unfavorably  as  to 
the  aims  of  the  association  : 

Addison  (Steuben  Co.),  Advertiser,  Weekly,  Reo. 
Record,  Weekly,  Dem. 


APPENDIX.  211 

Akron  (Erie  Co.),  Breeze,  Weekly,  Neu. 

Albany  (Albany  Co.),  Press  and  Knickerbocker,  Daily,  Ind. 

"  Poultry  Monthly,  Monthly,  Neu. 

Albion  (Orleans  Co.),  News,  Weekly,  Ind. 

Republican,  Weekly,  Dem. 

Alfred  Centre  (Alleghany  Co.),  Sabbath  Recorder,  Weekly,  Neu. 
Almond  New  Era,  Weekly,  Neu. 

Angelica  Every  Week,  Weekly,  Ind. 

Republican,  Weekly,  Neu. 
Antwerp  (Jefferson  Co.),  Gazette,  Weekly,  Rep. 
Arcade  (Wyoming  Co.),  Leader,  Weekly,  Ind. 
Auburn  (Cayuga  Co.),  Deutsche  Zeitung,  Weekly,  Ind. 
Bainbridge  (Chenango  Co.),  Republican,  Weekly,  Ind. 
Ballston  Spa  (Saratoga  Co.),  Journal,  Weekly,  Rep. 
Batavia  (Genesee  Co.),  Daily  News,  Daily,  Ind. 

Spirit  of  the  Times,  Weekly,  Dem. 
Bath  (Steuben  Co.),  Steuben  Courier,  Weekly,  Rep. 
Bath-on- Hudson  (Rensselaer  Co.),  Star  and  Observer,  Weekly,  Dem. 
Belmont  (Alleghany  Co.),  Alliance  Leader,  Weekly,  Farmers'  Alliance. 
Binghamton  (Broome  Co.),  Herald,  Weekly,  Ind. 
Buffalo,  Express,  Daily,  Ind. -Rep. 

44        Freie  Presse,  Daily,  Rep. 
Horse  World,  Weekly,  Neu. 

44       Volks  Freund,  Daily,  Neu. 

11       Queries  Magazine,  Monthly,  Neu. 
Calicoon  Depot  (Sullivan  Co.),  Echo,  Weekly,  Ind. 
Canastota  (Madison  Co.),  Journal,  Weekly,  Rep. 
Canisteo  (Steuben  Co.),  Times,  Weekly,  Ind. 

Canton  (St.  Lawrence  Co.),  Commercial  Advertiser,  Weekly,  Dem. 
Catskill  (Greene  Co.),  Recorder,  Weekly,  Dem. 
Cattaraugus  (Cattaraugus  Co.),  Times,  Weekly,  Ind.-Rep. 
Chateaugay  (Franklin  Co.^  Record,  Weekly,  Rep. 
Clinton  (Oneida  Co.),  Courier,  Weekly,  Ind. 
Cohocton  (Steuben  Co.),  Valley  Times,  Weekly,  Ind. 
Cooperstown  (Otsego  Co.),  Freeman's  Journal,  Weekly,  Dem. 
Cleveland  (Oswego  Co.),  World,  Weekly,  Neu. 
Corning  (Steuben  Co.),  Democrat,  Daily,  Dem. 
Dansville  (Livingston  Co.),  Express,  Weekly,  Dem. 
Deposit  (Broome  Co.),  Tri-County  Journal,  Weekly,  Ind. 
De  Ruyter  (Madison  Co.),  Gleaner,  Weekly,  Rep. 
Dryden  (Tompkins  Co.),  Herald,  Weekly,  Ind. 
Echo  (Suffolk  Co.),  Rural  Long  Islander,  Monthly,  Neu. 
Ellenville  (Ulster  Co.),  Journal,  Weekly,  Rep. 

Fairport  (Monroe  Co.),  Patriot  and  Current  History,  Monthly,  Neu. 
Finley's  Lake  (Chautauqua  Co.),  Breeze,  Weekly,  Rep. 
Fonda  (Montgomery  Co.),  Mohawk  Valley  Democrat,  Weekly,  Dem, 
Ft.  Edward  (Washington  Co.),  Advertiser,  Weekly,  Rep. 
Fredonia  (Chautauqua  Co.),  Censor.  Weekly.  Rep. 
Franklinville  (Cattaraugus  Co.),  Chronicle,  Weekly,  Ind. 
Fulton  (Oswego  Co.),  Patriot  and  Gazette,  Weekly,  Rep. 


WHO  PAYS    YOUR    rAXES? 


Geneva  (Ontario  Co.),  Advertiser,  Weekly,  Ind. 

"  "  Gazette,  Weekly,  Dem. 

Glens  Falls  (Warren  Co.),  Republican,  Weekly,  Ind.-Dem. 
Gouverneur  (St.  Lawrence  Co.),  Northern  Tribune,  Weekly,  Rep, 
Greenport  (Suffolk  Co.),  Republican  Watchman,  Weekly,  Dem. 
Hancock  (Delaware  Co.),  Herald,  Weekly,  Dem. 
Hannibal  (Oswego  Co.),  News  and  Reveille,  Weekly,  Ind. 
Ithaca  (Tompkins  Co.),  Chronicle,  Weekly,  Ind. 

"  u  Democrat,  Weekly,  Dem. 

Jefferson  (Schoharie  Co.),  Courier,  Weekly,  Dem. 
Kingston  (Ulster  Co.),  Leader,  Daily,  Dem. 
Le  Roy  (Genesee  Co.),  Gazette,  Weekly,  Rep. 
Machias  (Cattaraugus  Co.),  Star,  Weekly,  Pro. 
Malone  'Franklin  Co.),  Farmer,  Weekly,  Rep. 

Palladium,  Weekly,  Rep. 

Marion  (Wayne  Co.),  Enterprise,  Weekly,  Rep. 
Marlborough  (Ulster  Co.),  Record,  Weekly,  Ind. 
Monticello  (Sullivan  Co.),  Republican,  Weekly,  Rep. 
Moorsville  (Madison  Co.),  Leader,  Weekly,  Rep. 
Newburgh  (Orange  Co.),  Leader,  Weekly,  Neu. 
New  York  City,  American  Dairyman,  Weekly,  Neu. 
'        "          American  Sentinel,  Weekly,  Rep. 
"          Bahn  Frei,  Weekly,  Neu. 

Harlem  Chronicle,  Weekly,  Neu. 
'         '          China  Decorator,  Monthly,  Neu. 
'         '          Insurance  Critic,  Monthly,  Neu. 
'         '          Insurance  Law  Journal,  Monthly,  Neu. 
'         '          Metropolitan  and  Rural  Home,  Monthly,  Neu. 
1         '          Sanitary  Era,  Monthly,  Neu. 
'         '          Freeman's  Journal,  Weekly,  Neu. 
Newark  Valley  (Tioga  Co.),  Herald,  Weekly,  Ind. 
North  Collins  (Erie  Co.),  Leader,  Weekly,  Ind. 

North  Chili  (Monroe  Co.),  Earnest  Christian,  Monthly,  Religious,  Neu, 
Nunda  (Livingston  Co.),  News,  Weekly,  Rep. 
Olean  (Cattaraugus  Co.),  Herald,  Daily,  Dem. 

"  "  "       Times,  Daily,  Rep. 

Oneida  (Madison  Co.),  Dispatch,  Semi-Weekly,  Rep. 
Oneonta  (Otsego  Co.),  Spy,  Daily,  Neu. 
Oswego  Falls  (Oswego  Co.),  Observer,  Weekly,  Ind. 
Oswego  (Oswego  Co.),  Gazette,  Weekly,  Dem. 
Penn  Yan  (Yates  Co.),  Vineyardist,  Semi-Monthly,  Neu. 

"          Express,  Weekly,  Rep. 
Perry  (Wyoming  Co.),  News,  Weekly,  Ind. 
Pike  (Wyoming  Co.),  Gazette,  Weekly,  Ind. 
Plattsburg  (Clinton  Co.),  Republican,  Weekly,  Dem 
Port  Byron  (Cayuga  Co.),  Chronicle,  Weekly,  Rep. 
Potsdam  (St.  Lawrence  Co.),  Courier  and  Freeman,  Weekly,  Rep. 
Prattsburgh  (Steuben  Co.),  News,  Weekly,  Ind. 
Randolph  (Cattaraugus  Co.),  Register,  Weekly,  Rep. 
"  "  "         Courant,  Weekly,  Dem. 


APPENDIX.  213 


Richmondville  (Schoharie  Co.).  Phoenix,  Weekly,  Dem. 
Rome  (Oneida  Co.),  Citizen^Semi- Weekly,  Rep. 

"      CentralN.  Y.  News,  Weekly,  Tern. 
Rochester  (Monroe  Co.),  Times,  Daily,  Ind. 
41       Herald,  Daily,  Ind. 

"          "       American  Rural  Home,  Weekly,  Neu. 
Rochester  (Monroe  Co.),  Farm  Life,  Weekly,  Rep. 
St.  Regis  Falls  (Franklin  Co.),  News,  Weekly,  Rep. 
Salem  (Washington  Co.),  Axiom,  Weekly,  Rep. 

"      Review-Press,  Weekly,  Dem. 
Sandy  Hill  (Washington  Co.),  Herald,  Weekly,  Rep. 
Sardinia  (Erie  Co.),  Censor,  Weekly,  Ind. 
Savonia  (Steuben  Co.),  Review,  Weekly,  Neu. 
Sherman  (Chautauqua  Co.),  News,  Weekly,  Rep. 
Sing  Sing  (Westchester  Co.),  Republican,  Weekly,  Rep. 
Syracuse  (Onondaga  Co.),  Express,  Weekly,  Ind. 

"       University  News,  Weekly,  Neu. 
"       Herald,  Sunday,  Ind. 
"  "  "       Times,  Sunday,  Ind. 

Ticonderoga  (Essex  Co.),  Sentinel,  Weekly,  Ind. 
Tottenville  (Richmond  Co.),  Times,  Weekly,  Rep. 
Troupsburgh  (Steuben  Co.),  Farmers,  Weekly,  Farmers'  Alliance. 

"      Northern  Budget,  Weekly,  Neu. 
Utica  (Oneida  Co.),  Tribune,  Sundays,  Ind. 

Valatie  (Columbia  Co.),  Kinderhook  Rough  Notes,  Weekly,  Dem. 
Victor  (Ontario  Co.),  Herald,  Weekly,  Ind. 
Warsaw  (Wyoming  Co.),  Times,  Weekly,  Dem. 
Watertown  (Jefferson  Co.),  Post,  Weekly,  Ind.-Rep. 
Watkins  (Schuyler  Co.),  Democrat,  Weekly,  Dem. 
Weedsport  (Cayuga  Co.),  Chief,  Weekly,  Ind. 

The  following  are  non-committal : 

Albany  (Albany  Co.),  Der  Erz-Druid,  Monthly,  Neu. 
"  "          "       Work  at  Home,  Monthly,  Neu. 

Albion  (Orleans  Co.),  Oologist,  Monthly,  Neu. 
Alfred  Centre  (Alleghany  Co.),  Sabbath  Recorder,  Weekly,  Neu. 
Auburn  (Cayuga  Co.),  Purple  and  Gold,  Quarterly,  College. 
Avoca  (Steuben  Co.),  Advance,  Weekly,  Ind. 
Bay  Shore  (Suffolk  Co.),  Journal,  Weekly,  Rep. 
Binghamton  (Broome  Co.),  Railroader,  Monthly,  Neu. 
Black  River  (Jefferson  Co.),  News,  Weekly,  Dem. 
Bluff  Point  (Yates  Co.),  Visitor,  Monthly,  Neu. 
Brooklyn,  Advertiser,  Semi-Weekly,  Neu. 

"         Brazilian  Missions,  Monthly,  Neu. 

"         Seed,  Monthly,  Neu. 
Buffalo,  American  Investments,  Monthly,  Neu. 

"       Iron  Industry  Gazette,  Monthly,  Neu. 

"       Dental  Advertiser,  Quarterly,  Neu. 
Camden  (Oneida  Co.))  Advance  Journal,  Weekly,  Ind. 


214 


WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 


Canton  (St.  Lawrence  Co.),  St.  Louis  Plaindealer,  Weekly,  Rep 
Corning  (Steuben  Co.),  Journal,  Weekly,  Rep. 
Coxsackie  (Greene  Co.),  News,  Weekly,  Ind. 
Dansville  (Livingston  Co.),  Breeze,  Weekly,  Ind. 
East  Syracuse  (Onondaga  Co.),  News,  Weekly,  Neu. 
Ellensville  (Ulster  Co.),  Press,  Weekly,  Dem. 
Elmira  (ChemungCo.),  Echoes,  Weekly,  Neu. 
Fillmore  (Alleghany  Co.),  Observer,  Weekly,  Ind. 
Fort  Plain  (Montgomery  Co.),  Free  Press,  Weekly,  Rep. 
Franklinville  (Cattaraugus  Co.),  Journal,  Weekly,  Ind. 
Freeville  (Tompkins  Co.),  Friend,  Monthly,  Ind. 
Glen  Cove  (Queens  Co. ),  Gazette,  Weekly,  Ind. 
Hillsdale  (Columbia  Co.),  Harbinger,  Weekly.  Neu. 
Hornellsville  (Steuben  Co.),  Herald,  Weekly,  Rep. 
"  "          "       Times,  Daily,  Rep. 

"  "         "      Tribune,  Daily,  Dem. 

Ilion  (Herkimer  Co.),  News,  Weekly,  Neu. 
Kingston  (Ulster  Co.),  Freeman,  Daily,  Rep. 
Lyons  (Wayne  Co.),  Republican,  Semi-Weekly,  Rep. 
Newark  (Wayne  Co.),  Courier,  Weekly,  Dem. 
Newburgh  (Orange  Co.),  Telegram,  Weekly,  Rep. 
New  York  City,  American  Exporter,  Monthly,  Neu. 
"      American  Pressman,  Monthly,  Neu. 
"      Art  in  Advertising,  Monthly,  Neu. 
"          *'     Baptist  Home  Mission  Monthly,  Monthly,  Neu. 
"      Baptist  Review,  Quarterly,  Neu. 
"      Christoforo  Colombo,  Daily,  Neu. 
"  "     Collector,  Monthly,  Neu. 

"     Cosmopolitan,  Monthly,  Neu. 
"  "      Die  Arbeiter  Zeitung,  Weekly,  Labor. 

"  "     Delineator,  Monthly,  Neu. 

"     Evening  Telegram,  Daily,  Ind. 
"  "     Elanunciador,  Monthly,  Neu. 

"  "     Electric  Power,  Monthly,  Neu. 

"  "      English  Pulpit  of  To-day,  Monthly,  Neu. 

"  "      Far  and  Near,  Monthly,  Neu. 

"      Free  Russia,  Monthly,  Neu. 

"  "     Freemason's  Journal,  Semi-Monthly,  Neu. 

"  "      Gaillard's  Medical  Journal,  Monthly,  Neu. 

"  "     Harlem  City,  Weekly,  Neu. 

Hebrew  Journal,  Weekly,  Neu. 

Hotel  Register,  Weekly,  Neu. 

Herald  of  Health,  Monthly,  Neu. 

Illustrated  Christian  Weekly,  Weekly,  Neu. 

Iron  Age,  Weekly,  Neu. 

Insurance  Times,  Monthly,  Neu. 

Journal  of  the  Society  of    Amateur  Photographers  of    New   York, 

Monthly,  Neu. 
Life,  Weekly,  Neu. 
Lithographic  Art  Journal,  Monthly,  Neu. 


APPENDIX.  21$ 


New  York  City  Lumber  Trade  Journal,  Semi-Monthly,  Neu. 
"     Literature,  Neu. 

"      Mercantile  and  Exchange  Advocate,  Weekly,  Neu. 
"  "      Mexico  Moderno,  Weekly,  Neu. 

"  "      Manhattan  Athletic  Club  Chronicle,  Monthly,  Neu. 

"      Nationalist,  Weekly,  Ind. 
"  "      Oak  Leaf,  Monthly,  Neu. 

"      Our  Society  Journal,  Monthly,  Neu. 
"  "     Our  Times,  Monthly,  Neu. 

"     Poultry  Raising,  Monthly,  Neu. 
"  "     Power-Steam,  Monthly,  Neu. 

"  "     Plumber's  Trade  Journal,  Semi-Monthly,  Neu. 

"     Press,  Daily,  Morning,  Rep. 
u  "     Real  Estate  Journal,  Weekly,  Ind. 

"      Sunday  News,  Sundays,  Neu. 
"  "     School  Journal,  Weekly,  Neu. 

u     Science,  Weekly,  Neu. 
"  "     Strids  Ropet,  Weekly,  Neu. 

"  u     Taubstummen  Welt  Blatt,  Semi-Monthly,  Neu. 

"     University  Magazine,  Monthly,  Neu. 
Norwich  (Chenango  Co.),  Union,  Weekly,  Dem. 
Ogdensburg  (St.  Lawrence  Co.),  Advance,  Weekly,  Dem. 
Ovid  (Seneca  Co.),  Independent,  Weekly,  Ind. 
Patchogue  (Suffolk  Co.),  Advance,  Ind. -Rep. 
Perry  (Wyoming  Co.),  Herald,  Weekly,  Rep. 
Phelps  (Ontario  Co.),  Citizen,  Weekly,  Ind. 
Rochester  (Monroe  Co.),  Casket,  Weekly,  Ind. 
Savannah  (Wayne  Co.),  News,  Weekly,  Ind. 
Silver  Creek  (Chautauqua  Co.),  Hanover  Gazette,  Weekly,  Ind. 
Syracuse  (Onondaga  Co.),  Official  Organ,  Monthly,  Ind. 
Troy  (Rensselaer  Co.),  Carriage  and  Harness  Journal,  Monthly,  Neu. 
Union  (Broome  Co.),  News,  Weekly,  Ind. 
Utica  (Oneida  Co.),  Volksblatt,  Semi-Weekly,  Neu. 
Warwick  (Orange  Co.),  Advertiser,  Weekly,  Ind. 
Watertown  (Jefferson  Co.),  Argus,  Weekly,  Labor. 
Wellsburgh  (Chemung  Co.),  News,  Weekly,  Ind. 
Yonkers  (Westchester  Co.),  Home  Journal,  Weekly. 

Total,  103.  There  are  doubtless  errors  in  this  list.  Many  papers  say 
one  thing  at  one  time,  and  another  at  another.  We  shall  be  glad  to  get 
corrections.  The  papers  indicated  on  our  lists  as  "neutral"  do  not  at 
present  take  sides  in  politics. 

LICENSE   TAXES. 

The  following  is  taken  from  an  old  paper  ;  it  is  a  little  out  of  the  line  of 
the  Tax  Reform  Platform,  but  it  is  too  good  a  presentation  of  a  peculiar 
view  to  be  omitted. 


2i6  WHO  PAYS  YOUR   TAXES? 

Saloon-keeper  :  "  I  believe  the  tax  on  real  estate  alone  to  be  the  right  tax.  ' 

The  Doctor:  "  Then  you  will  vote  for  it?" 

"Most  certainly  not.  Don't  you  give  me  credit  for  any  sense ?  Can't 
you  see  that  tax  theory  would  knock  the  spots  off  from  saloon  keeping? 
We  don't  mind  encouraging  the  prohibitionists  a  little.  It  will  be  a  long 
time  before  they  can  pass  their  laws,  and  they  can  be  easily  violated  or 
evaded;  but  your  land  taxation  plan  goes  right  to  the  root  of  the  saloon 
business  and  will  kill  it." 

By  this  time  I  was  getting  considerably  interested,  and  asked  for  an 
explanation. 

"  Now,  look  here,  doctor,  you  know  just  as  well  as  I  do  why  I  must 
oppose  it.  Can't  you  see  that  this  tax  on  land  alone  means  that  there  will 
be  no  taxes  of  any  kind — government  license,  town  license,  special  tax, 
revenue  tax — levied  on  our  business  ?  " 

"Certainly  you  will  be  relieved  of  all  taxation,"  I  replied. 

"  Relieved  !     Yes,  relieved  of  over  half  our  profits,  you  mean." 

Rising  and  going  to  the  sideboard,  he  poured  out  a  glass  of  liquor,  and, 
returning,  held  it  up  to  the  light. 

"Look  here,"  said  he,  "that  whisky  retails  for  ten  cents.  Take  off 
all  the  taxes,  and  I  would  have  to  retail  it  for  five,  and  make  just  half  as 
much  per  glass  as  I  do  now.  Now,  the  majority  of  men  drink  all  they 
would  if  whisky  was  cheaper,  and  therefore  I  wouldn't  sell  much  if  any 
more  than  I  do  now.  Your  single  tax  would  cut  down  the  saloon-keeper's 
profits  at  least  one-half.  That  is  why  he  will  be  against  you.  You  destroy 
the  monopoly. 

"  If  there  were  no  license  fees  to  be  paid,  anybody  who  had  a  bottle  and 
two  glasses  could  start  a  saloon.  To-day,  however,  a  man  has  to  pay  a 
certain  amount  down  for  a  license  ;  he  has  got  to  get  a  number  of  citizens 
to  indorse  his  application  for  a  license.  He  has  to  invest  so  much  money 
in  whisky,  and,  as  I  showed  you  a  few  moments  ago,  so  much  more  in 
taxes.  A  poor  man  can't  go  into  the  saloon  business  now.  Did  you  ever 
notice  how  we  really  prevent  competition  in  our  business  ?  No  matter  how 
many  saloons  there  are,  the  price  is  always  kept  up.  By  the  way,  your  tax 
scheme  would  do  away  with  treating  to  a  great  extent,  and  it  is  on  treating 
that  the  saloon  thrives.  How  could  it  do  that  ?  In  this  way  :  Treating  is 
a  matter  of  ostentation,  of  pride.  A  man  treats  to  show  that  he  is  able  to 
spend  money  and  prove  himself  to  be  sociable.  Take  all  taxes  off  from 
whisky,  wine,  and  beer,  and  they  would  be  so  cheap  a  man  would  be 
ashamed  to  treat.  No  one  would  ask  another  in  to  take  a  three-cent  drink  ; 
they  would  buy  cigars,  a  lunch,  or  something  of  that  sort. 


APPENDIX. 

"  Why,  you  hurt  us  on  all  sides  ;  you  take  away  our  profits  ;  you  destroy 
our  monopoly  ;  you  break  up  the  treating  habit ;  and,  worse  yet,  you  destroy 
our  respectability." 

"How?" 

"  By  not  taxing  us.  The  license  is  a  certificate  of  respectability  ;  it 
makes  our  business  just  as  good  as  any  man's  ;  nay,  even  better.  We  are 
under  the  special  protection  of  both  State  and  general  governments.  Sup- 
posing two  men  come  into  my  saloon  and  begin  to  fight,  the  police  will 
come  in  and  arrest  them,  or  I  may  kick  them  out  for  disorderly  conduct. 
I  am  all  right — my  license  says  I  am  ;  and  if  these  men  can't  behave  in  a 
respectable  place,  they  can  be  fined  as  disorderly  persons.  But  remove  from 
me  the  support  of  law,  and  when  a  fight  occurred  in  my  saloon  it  would  be  a 
disorderly  place,  and  the  police  would  arrest  me  and  close  up  my  place. 
You  would  put  me  on  the  level  with  the  house  of  ill-fame. 

"  Doctor,  the  whisky  men  will  fight  the  real  estate  tax  party  because 
the  carrying  out  of  its  principles  would  be  a  dangerous  thing  for  the 
saloon." 

MR.    WELLS'S   REPORT. 

It  was  first  proposed  to  publish  in  full  the  Hon.  David  A.  Wells's  "  Re- 
port of  the  Commissioners  to  Revise  the  Laws  for  the  Assessment  and  Col- 
lection of  Taxes  in  New  York,  in  accordance  with  the  Act  of  April  26, 
1870,"  together  with  his  supplementary  report,  which  reached  many  editions 
here  and  were  printed  in  England  and  in  France.  It  was  found,  however, 
that  the  examples  used  in  these  reports  had  become  so  antiquated  as  to  be 
unavailable.  It  is  greatly  to  be  regretted  that  the  report  should  have  lost 
currency  in  any  degree,  as  substantially  nothing  has  been  added  in  the  way 
of  ideas  since  that  time  to  those  which  are  contained  in  that  able  document. 

No  one  could  do  a  greater  service  to  economic  study  than  by  taking  up 
that  report,  bringing  the  figures  down  to  date,  revising  the  data  as  to  exist- 
ing laws  so  as  to  correspond  with  present  conditions,  and,  whilst  adhering 
strictly  to  the  form  of  the  book,  giving  it  the  present  applicability  of  a  cur- 
rent publication.  If  any  competent  person  will  undertake  this  work,  this 
association  will  be  glad  to  assist  in  its  publication  in  any  way  that  may  be 
proper,  and  the  report  being  now  out  of  print  and  being  difficult  to  obtain, 
this  association  will  furnish  a  copy  for  that  purpose  to  any  one  who  may, 
with  its  approval,  undertake  the  work.  We  make  this  suggestion  with  the 
full  approval  of  Mr.  Wells.1 

1  Commissioner  Andrews  said  that  David  A.  Wells  did  a  noble  work  in  exposing 
the  fallacies,  incongruities,  and  contradictions  of  the  present  laws,  with  such  singular 


2l8  WHO   PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

The  same  remarks  apply  to  the  address  entitled  "  Taxation,"  delivered 
by  George  H,  Andrews  before  the  New  York  Assembly's  Committee  of 
Ways  and  Means,  October  6,  1874. 

A  revision  of  these  two  would  give,  with  little  labor,  all  the  necessary 
figures  and  statistics  needed  for  an  exhaustive  study  of  this  aspect  of  taxa- 
tion. Taxation  is  not,  however,  a  matter  of  figures,  but  of  principles. 

minuteness  and  convincing  clearness.  The  tax-payers  owe  to  him  a  lasting  debt  of 
gratitude  for  the  courage  and  capacity  he  exhibited  in  striking  a  mortal  blow  at  the 
gigantic  fraud  which,  under  the  name  of  a  personal  assessment  law,  reduces  the  value 
of  real  estate,  fetters  commerce,  oppresses  the  manufacturer,  cripples  the  tradesman, 
hinders  the  rising  mechanic,  robs  the  widow  and  orphan,  makes  the  rich  richer  and  the 
poor  poorer,  expatriates  many  of  our  best  citizens,  taints  the  moral  atmosphere,  vitiates 
social  relations— all  to  foster  the  interests  of  other  cities  and  States  at  the  expense  of 
our  own. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY. 

THE  following  bibliography  of  taxation  is  taken  from  The  Reader's  Guide 
in  Social  and  Political  Science,  edited  by  R.  R.  Bowker  and  George  lies, 
and  published  in  1891  by  G.  P.  Putnam's  Sons,  for  the  Society  of  Political 
Education,  as  Economic  Tract  No.  XXVII.  The  following  letter  from  Mr. 
lies  may  properly  be  inserted  here. 

The  Reader's  Guide  says,  touching  the  bibliography  of  land  and  rent : 

"  Kinner  and  Laveleye  give  a  general  view  of  the  development  of  prop- 
erty in  land.  Maine  is  for  advanced  students.  Pollock's  sketch  of  British 
land  laws  is  brief  and  clear.  Leslie's  account  of  British  and  Irish  land  sys- 
tems is  fuller.  The  Cobden  Club  Essays,  edited  by  Probyn,  serve  as  a  good 
introduction  to  modern  systems  of  land  tenure.  Meyer's  official  report  and 
Rocher's  treatise  are  valuable.  Prothero  describes  British  agriculture. 
Ricardo  is  the  chief  expounder  of  the  doctrine  of  rent.  Wollser  is  his 
principal  American  disciple.  The  criticisms  of  Carey  have  been  adopted 
by  the  so-called  '  American  '  school  of  financial  writers.  Brooklyn  Library 
Catalogue,  p.  919,  contains  important  entries.  See  also  various  chapters  in 
Buckle,  Green,  Escott,  and  other  standard  historians  bearing  on  land  sys- 
tems. Thorold  Rogers  in  his  Cobden  and  Modern  Political  Opinions,  1873, 
pp.  73-108,  discusses  the  land  question.  Donaldson's  History  is  indis- 
pensable to  students  of  the  public  lands  question  in  the  United  States." 

After  this  introduction  comes  the  following  list  of  books  recommended 
to  students  : 

Allison,  E.  P.,  a«</Penrose,  BOIES.    Ground  Rents  in  Philadelphia. 

Phila.,  Wharton  School  of  Finance  and  Economy,   1889.     19  pp.  O.  pap. 
25  c. 

Cheyney,  E.  P.  Anti-Rent  Agitation  in  the  State  of  New  York, 
1839-1846.  Phila.,  Wharton  School  of  Finance  and  Economy,  1889.  O. 
pap.  50  c. 

Oox,  S.  S.  Free  Land  and  Free  Trade.  N.  Y.,  Putnam,  1880.  D. 
$1.  A  clearly  written  little  treatise  on  the  application  to  the  United  States 
of  the  principles  that  governed  the  repeal  of  the  British  corn  laws. 


220  WH°  PAYS  YOUR   TAXES? 

Dixwell,  G.  B.  Progress  and  Poverty,  a  review  of  the  doctrines  of 
H.  George.  Cambridge,  Mass.,  1882.  46  pp.  O. 

Egleston,  MELVILLE.     Land  System  of  the  New  England  Colonies. 

Baltimore,  Johns  Hopkins  Univ.,  1886.     66  pp.  O.  pap.  50  c. 

Elliott,  J.  R.  American  Farms  :  their  condition  and  future.  N.  Y., 
Putnam,  1890.  6  +  262  pp.  D.  $1.25. 

George,  H.  Progress  and  Poverty.  An  inquiry  into  causes  of  in- 
dustrial depressions,  and  of  the  increase  of  want  with  increase  of  wealth. 
The  remedy.  1879.  N,  Y.,  Henry  George  &  Co.,  1888.  250  pp.  O.  cl., 
$1.00  ;  pap.,  35  c. 

No  recent  economic  work  has  excited  more  popular  interest,  or  has  received  a 
wider  circulation.  The  author's  proposal  that  a  "single  tax"  be  imposed  to  equal 
ground-rent  has  called  forth  world-wide  discussion.  In  addition  to  criticisms  included 
under  land  and  rent,  may  be  mentioned  that  found  in,  last  chapter,  J.  Roe's  Contemporary 
Socialism  and  in  G.  Guntcn's  Wealth  and  Progress.  R.  Giffen,  in  his  Growth  of  Cap- 
ital, states  that  British  wealth  in  land  is  diminishing  proportionately,  and  is  now  one- 
sixth  of  the  whole. 

In  advocacy  of  the  doctrines  of  Progress  and  Poverty  (also  of  Tariff  Reform  and 
Ballot  Reform)  The  Standard  is  published  at  42  University  Place,  New  York,  $3  per 
annum.  From  the  same  office  is  issued  a  variety  of  tracts  and  leaflets  similar  in  pur- 
pose. 

George,  H.  The  Land  Question :  what  it  involves,  and  how  alone  it 
can  be  settled.  N.  Y.,  H.  George  &  Co.,  1888.  87  pp.  D.  pap.,  20  c. 

Harris,  W.  T.     The  Right  of  Property  and  the  Ownership  of  Land. 

Bost.,  Cupples  &  Hurd,  1887.     4«  pp.  O.  pap.,  25  c. 
Against  H.  George's  theories. 

Mayer,  Louis.  Ground  Rents  in  Maryland.  Baltimore,  1883,  Cush- 
ings  &  Bailey.  158  pp.  O.  $1.50. 

Miller,  J.  BLEECKER.  Progress  and  Robbery.  Two  American  an- 
swers to  H.  George,  the  Demi-Communist.  N.  Y.,  Evening  Post,  1889. 
16  pp.  S.  pap.,  i  c. 

Moody,  W.  C.  Land  and  Labor  in  the  United  States.  N.  Y., 
Scribner,  1883.  306  pp.  D.  $1.50. 

Nott,  C.  C.  A  Good  Farm  for  Nothing.  Reasons  for  the  decline  of 
agriculture  and  farm  values  in  New  England.  N.  Y.,  Evening  Post,  1889. 
1 6  pp.  S.  pap.,  i  c. 

Olmstead,  DWIGHT  H.  Land  Transfer  Reform  ;  or,  the  Free  Trans- 
fer of  Land.  N.  Y.,  Baker,  Voorhis  &  Co.,  1887.  116  pp.  O.  pap.,  25  c. 

By  one  of  the  land  commissioners  appointed  by  Legislature  of  New  York,  1884. 
Gives  detailed  information  for  the  scientific  registration  and  indexing  of  land  records, 
including  explanation  of  proposed  legislative  bills  for  block  and  lot  indexing. 

Phillips,  W.  A.  Labor,  Land,  and  Law.  A  search  for  the  missing 
wealth  of  the  working  classes.  N.  Y.,  Scribner,  1886.  471  pp.  D.  $2.50. 

A  historical  review  of  the  shares  of  production  taken  by  landlord,  capitalist,  and 
employer,  concluding  with  proposed  remedies. 

Ross,  DENMAN  W.     Early  History   of  Land-Holding  among  the 
Germans.     Boston,  Soule  &  Bugbee,  1883.     6  +  273  PP-  D. 
Contains  biography  of  general  subject. 


APPENDIX.  221 

Sato,  SHOSUKE.    History  of  the  Land  Question  in  the  United  States. 

Baltimore,  Johns  Hopkins  Univ.,  1886.      $1.25. 

Walker,  FRANCIS  A.  Land  and  Its  Rent.  Bost,  Little,  Brown  &  Co., 
1883.  220  pp.  S.  75  c. 

Reviews  the  doctrines  of  Carey,  Bastiat,  Mill,  Leroy-Beaulieu,  and  H.  George  as 
to  rent  Shows  how  economists  have  discriminated  between  land  and  other  forms  of 
property.  Objects  to  Mill's  proposal  that  the  State  should  appropriate  future  unearned 
increment  on  grounds  of  political  expediency,  not  on  grounds  of  political  equity.  The 
best  American  book  on  the  subject  from  the  conservative  standpoint. 

Winn,  H.  Property  in  Land :  an  essay  on  the  new  crusade.  N.  Y., 
Putnam,  1888.  73  pp.  D.  pap.,  25  c. 

An  adverse  criticism  of  H.  George's  propositions. 

Argyll,  DUKE  OF,  and  George,  H.  Property  in  Land :  a  passage- 
at-arms.  N.  Y.,  J.  W.  Lovell  Co.,  1886.  77  pp.  S.  pap  ,  15  c. 

Arnold.  ARTHUR.     Free  Land.    Lond.,  Kegan  Paul,  1880.    371  pp.  D. 
Presents  the  British  land  question. 

Bateman,  J.  Acre-ocracy  of  England,  a  list  of  the  owners  of  3,000 
acres  and  upwards,  with  their  possessions  and  incomes,  arranged  under  their 
various  counties.  Lond.,  Pickering,  1876.  220  pp.  D. 

Birkbeck,  W.  LLOYD.  Historical  Sketch  of  the  Distribution  of 
Land  in  England ;  with  suggestions  for  some  improvement  in  the  law. 
Lond.  and  N.  Y.,  Macmillan,  1885.  D.  $1.50. 

Broderick,  GEO.  C.     English  Land  and   English  Landlords.     An 

inquiry  into  the  origin  and  character  of  the  English  land  system,  with  pro- 
posals for  its  reform.     Lond.  and  N.  Y.,  Cassell,  1881.     515  pp.  D. 

Caird,  JAMES,  M.  P.  Prairie  Farming  in  America.  N.  Y.,  Apple- 
ton,  1859. 

Elliott,  T.  J.  The  Land  Question.  Lond.  &  N.  Y.,  Cassell  &  Co. 
35.  6d. 

Treats  of  certain  phases  of  the  English  land  question. 

Fisher,  JOSEPH.  History  of  Land-Holding  in  England.  Lond., 
1876.  O. 

Gomme,  G.  L.  The  Village  Community,  with  special  reference  to 
the  origin  and  form  of  its  survivals  in  Britain.  Contemporary  Science  Se- 
ries. N.  Y.,Scribner,  1890.  299  pp.  D.  $1.25. 

Adds  to  the  researches  of  Nasse,  Maine,  and  Seebohm  much  new  information. 

Hill,  OCTAVIA.  Our  Common  Land,  and  other  short  essays.  Lond., 
Macmillan,  1877-.  206  pp.  S. 

A  plea  for  preservation  of  commons  and  public  parks. 

Kay,  JOSEPH.  Free  Trade  in  Land.  With  Preface  by  John  Bright. 
Lond.,  Kegan  Paul,  1879.  O.  55. 

—  Same,  qth  ed.  With  review  of  recent  changes  in  the  land  laws  of 
England,  by  G.  O.  Morgan.  Omitting  statistical  appendix.  Lond.,  Kegan 
Paul  1885.  124-iSopp.  D.  pap.,  is. 

Gives  a  clear  statement  of  the  position  in  1879  of  the  land  question  in  Great  Brit- 
ain and  Ireland,  together  with  a  summary  of  the  systems  of  land  tenure  throughout 
Europe,  with  some  of  the  results  traceable  to  them. 


222  WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

Kinnear,  J.  B.  Principles  of  Property  in  Land.  Lond.,  Smith, 
Elder  &  Co.  8°.  55. 

Regards  land-owning  as  one  of  the  social  and  conventional  rights  which  for  the 
general  good  communities  accord  to  individuals. 

Leslie,  T.  E.  CLIFFE.  Land  Systems  and  Industrial  Economy  of  Ire- 
land, England,  and  Continental  Countries.  Lond.,  1870.  O. 

"  A  comprehensive  survey." 

Levy,  J.  H.,  ed.  Symposium  on  the  Land  Question.  Lond.,  Fisher 
Unwin,  1890.  74  pp.  8°,  is. 

Low,  DAVID.  Landed  Property  and  the  Economy  of  Estates. 
Lond.,  Longmans,  1844.  12  +  680  pp.  D. 

"  Though  intended  as  a  landlord's  manual  gives  much  information  of  general  interest 
on  landed  property." 

Macdonell,  J.  The  Land  Question,  with  particular  reference  to  Eng- 
land and  Scotland.  Lond.,  Macmillan.  8°,  los.  6d. 

Maine,  Sir  H.  J.  SUMNER.  1822-1888.  Early  History  of  Institu- 
tions. N.  Y.,  Holt,  1880.  8°,  $3.50. 

Traces  property  in  land  to  the  period  when  bodies  of  men  held  together  by  the 
land  they  tilled  replaced  the  earliest  cultivating  groups  formed  of  kinsmen.  A  work 
of  the  first  rank. 

Maine,  Sir  H.  J-  SUMNER.  Village  Communities  in  the  East  and 
West.  N.  Y.,  Holt.  8°,  $3.50. 

Compares  the  development  of  Indian  and  Teutonic  village  communities.  Traces 
the  process  of  feudalization,  and  the  early  history  of  price  and  rent.  A  classic. 

Mallock,  W.  H.  Property  and  Progress ;  or,  a  brief  inquiry  into 
contemporary  social  agitation  in  England.  N.  Y.,  Putnam,  1884.  248  pp. 
D.  $i. 

Chiefly  a  reply  to  George's  "  Progress  and  Poverty,"  and  Hyndman's  "  England 
for  All." 

Montgomery,  W.  E.  History  of  Land  Tenure  in  Ireland.  Cam- 
bridge Univ.  Press,  1889.  191  pp.,  los.  6d. 

Valuable  and  suggestive. 

Nicholson,  J.  S.  Tenant's  Gain  not  Landlord's  Loss.  Edinburgh, 
D.  Douglas,  1883.  ii  +  173  pp.  D. 

Ogilby,  J.  Essay  on  the  Right  of  Property  in  Land  with  respect  to 
the  foundation  in  the  law  of  nature  and  the  rights  of  the  people.  Lond., 
1780.  O. 

Ouvry,  H.  A.  Stein  and  His  Reforms  in  Prussia,  with  reference  to 
the  land  question  in  England.  Lond.,  1873. 

Appendix  contains  views  of  R.  Cobden  and  J.  Stuart  Mill. 

Pollock,  F.  The  Land  Laws.  Lond.  and  N.  Y.,  Macmillan,  1886. 
224  pp.  D.  $i. 

Gives  the  British  land  laws  concisely  and  clearly. 

Probyn,  J.  W.,  ed.  Systems  of  Land  Tenure  in  various  countries. 
Cobden  Club  Essays.  New  and  rev.  ed.  Lond.  and  N.  Y.,  Cassell,  1881. 
6  +  534  pp.  D. 

Contains  Tenure  of  Land  in  Ireland,  by  Rt.  Hon.  M.  Longfield  ;  Law  and  Cus- 
tom of  Primogeniture,  by  Hon.  G.  C.  Brodrick  ;  Land  Laws  of  England,  by  G.  W. 


APPENDIX. 


223 


Hoskyns  ;  Tenure  of  Land  in  India,  by  Sir  G.  Campbell  ;  Land  System  of  France,  by 
T.  E.  Cliff  e  Leslie  ;  Russian  Agrarian  Legislation  of  1861,  by  Dr.  J.  Faucher ;  Agrarian 
Legislation  of  Prussia  during  Present  Century,  by  R.  B.  D.  Morier  ;  Land  System  of 
Belgium  and  Holland,  by  E.  de  Laveleye :  Farm  Land  and  Land  Laws  of  the  U.  S., 
by  C.  M.  Fisher. 

Prothero,  ROWLAND  E.  Pioneers  and  Progress  of  English  Farm- 
ing. Lond.,  Longmans,  1888.  14  +  390  pp.  D.  55. 

Richey,  ALEXANDER  G.  Irish  Land  Laws.  Second  ed.  Lond., 
Macmillan,  iSSi.  6  +  129  pp.  D.  35.  6d. 

Rogers,  J.  E.  THOROLD.  History  of  Agriculture  and  Prices  in 
England  from  the  year  after  the  Oxford  Parliament  to  the  commencement 
of  the  Continental  War.  6  vols.  Lond.  and  N.  Y.,  Macmillan,  1888.  O. 
$35-50. 

The  most  important  contribution  yet  made  to  the  economical  and  industrial  history 
of  England.  Volume  VI.  ends  with  1702  ;  in  preface  thereto,  September,  1887,  author 
expressed  his  intention  of  writing  two  concluding  volumes,  which  would  bring  the 
record  down  to  1793,  where  Thomas  Tooke's  work  begins,  which  with  Mr.  Newmarch's 
comes  to  1856. 

Seebohm,  F.  The  English  Village  Community,  examined  in  its 
relations  to  the  manorial  and  tribal  systems,  and  to  the  common  or  open 
field  system  of  husbandry.  Second  ed.  Lond.,  Longmans,  1883.  21  +• 
464  p.  D.  1 6s. 

Symson,  G.  History  of  the  Land  Tenures  and  Land  Classes  of  Ire- 
land; with  account  of  secret  agrarian  confederacies.  Lond.,  1871.  8°. 

Torrens,  SIR  ROBERT.  Transfer  of  Land  by  Registration  under  the 
Duplicate  Method  Operative  in  British  Colonies.  Cobden  Club  tract. 
Lond.  and  N.  Y.,  Cassell,  pap.  25  c. 

Thornton,  W.  T.  Plea  for  Peasant  Proprietors ;  with  outline  for 
their  establishment  in  Ireland.  Lond.,  Macmillan,  1874.  268  pp.  D. 

Wallace,  ALFRED  R.  Land  Nationalization,  its  Necessity  and  its 
Aims.  Lond.,  W.  Reeves,  1882.  14  +  244  D.  is.  6d. 

Young,  ARTHUR.     Farmer's  Tour  through  the  East  of  England. 

Lond.,  1771.     4  v.  8°. 

Young,  ARTHUR.  Six  Weeks'  Tour  through  the  Southern  Coun- 
ties of  England  and  Wales.  Lond.,  1776.  8°. 

Young,  ARTHUR.     Tour  in  Ireland.     Lond.,  1780.     2  v.  8°. 

Young,  ARTHUR.  Travels  in  France  during  the  Years  1787- 
1789.  Lond.,  1793.  2  v.  8°,  new  ed.  with  introd.  and  notes  by  M. 
Betham-Edwards.  N.  Y.,  Scribner&  Welford,  1889.  59  +  366  pp.  D.  $1.40. 

Young's  works  contain  the  best  contemporaneous  account  of  the  land-holding 
classes,  and  are  replete  with  valuable  economic  object  lessons. 

Foville,  ALFRED  DE.  Le  Morcellement.  Paris,  Guillaumin,  1885. 
283  pp.  D. 

Laboulaye,  EDOUARD.  Histoire  du  Droit  de  Propriete  Fonciere 
en  accident.  Paris,  A.  Durand,  1839.  12 +  532  pp.  D. 


224  WHO   PAYS  YOUR    TAXES? 

Laveleye,  EMILE  DE.   De  la  Fropriete  et  de  ses  formes  primitives. 

2me.  ed.     Paris,  Germer,  Bailliere  &  Cie.,  1877.     24  +  395  pp.  D. 

Laveleye,  EMILE  DE.  Primitive  Property.  Trans,  by  G.  R.  L.  Mar- 
riott; with  introd.  by  T.  E.  Cliffe  Leslie.  Lond.,  1878.  xliv  +  364pp. 

Describes  methods  of  land-owning  which  prevailed  in  primitive  times  in  Europe 
and  Asia,  and  still  prevail  in  Servia,  parts  of  Holland,  Switzerland,  Russia,  and  India. 
Traces  the  historical  development  of  property. 

Lavergne,  LEONCE  DE.  Economic  Rurale  de  la  France  depuis 
1789.  Paris,  1860.  485  pp.  D. 

Lavergne,  LEONCE  DE.  Rural  Economy  in  England,  Scotland  and 
Ireland.  Tr.  with  notes  by  a  Scotch  farmer.  Edinburgh,  1855.  400 
pp.0. 

Bernhardi,  THEODOR.  Versuch  einer  Kritik  der  Griinde  die  fur 
grosses  und  kleines  Grundeigenthum  angefuhrt  werden.  St.  Peters- 
burg, 1849.  668  pp.  D. 

The  best  early  theoretical  investigation. 

Eheberg,  K.  T.  Agrarische  Zustande  in  Italien.  Leipzig, 
Duncker  &  Humblot,  1886.  9+  158  pp.  D. 

Meyer,  RUDOLF.      Heimstatten  und  andere   Wirthschaftsgesetze 

der  Vereinigten  Staaten  von  America,  von  Canada,  Russland,  China, 
Indien,  Rumanien,  Serbien  und  England.  Berlin,  H.  Bahr,  1883.  32  + 
632  pp.  D. 

Reitzenstein,  F.  F.  v.  und  Nasse,  E.  Agrarische  Zustande  in 
Frankreich  und  England.  Leipzig,  Duncker  &  Humblot,  1884.  16  +  222 
pp.  D. 

Roscher,  W.  Nationalokonomik  des  Ackerbaues.  Stuttgart,  J.  G. 
Cotta,  1878.  10  +  668  pp.  O. 

V.  2  of  his  System.    A  French  tr.  is  published  by  Guillaumin,  Paris. 

Wagner,  ADOLPH.  Die  Abschaffung  des  privaten  Grundeigen- 
thums.  Leipzig.  Duncker  &  Humblot,  1870.  84  pp.  D. 

One  of  the  most  valuable  discussions  on  the  legitimacy  of  private  property  in  land. 

Loria,  ACHILLE.  La  Rendita  Fondiaria  e  la  sua  Elisione  Natural. 
Milan,  1880.  15  +  713  pp.  O. 

The  best  book  on  rent  as  influencing  methods  of  cultivation. 

Mortgages  in  Foreign  Countries  are  treated  fully  in  U.  S.  Consular 
Reports,  Nos.  no  and  in.  (Washington  Department  of  Senate,  1890.) 
Mortgage  Statistics  are  discussed  by  G.  K.  Holmes  in  Pubs,  of  Am.  Statis. 
Assoc.,  Boston,  No.  9,  March,  1890.  An  Investigation  on  Mortgage  In- 
debtedness for  the  Eleventh  Census  is  being  conducted  under  the  direc- 
tion of  G.  K.  Holmes.  Statistics  of  Mortgages  are  given  in  Bureaus  of 
Labor  Reports:  Illinois,  1888;  Michigan,  1888;  Nebraska,  1887-88. 

The  Financial  Reform  Almanac  gives  very  full  statistical  and  other  in- 
formation on  the  Land  Question  of  the  United  Kingdom.  Lond.,  Simpkin, 
Marshall  &  Co.  is. 

Canadian  Chapter  in  Agrarian  Agitation.  G.  lies.  Popular  Science 
Monthly,  Aug.,  1886. 


APPENDIX, 


225 


Farm  Mortgages  and  the  Small  Farmer.  W.  F.  Mappin.  Political 
Science  Q^^arferty,  Sept.,  1889. 

The  Mortgage  Evil  (with  special  reference  to  Indiana).  J.  P.  Dunn. 
Political  Science  Quarterly,  March,  1890. 

Western  Mortgages.     J.  \V.  Gleed.     Forum,  March,  1890. 

Western  Farm  Mortgages.     D.  R.  Goodloe.     Forum,  Nov.,  1890. 

Property  in  Land.     Sir  George  Campbell.      Westm.  Review,  Feb.,  1890. 

Why  the  Farmer  is  not  Prosperous.  C.  W.  Davis.  Forum,  April, 
1890. 

When  the  Farmer  will  be  Prosperous.  C.  W.  Davis.  Forum,  May, 
1890. 

Exhaustion  cf  the  Arable  Lands.     C.  W.  Davis.     Forum,  June,  1890. 

Probabilities  of  Agriculture.     C.  W.  Davis.     Forum,  Nov.,  1890. 

The  Nationalization  of  Land.  I.  How  to  nationalize  the  land.  F.  L. 
Soper.  Westm.  Review,  Sept.,  1889.  2.  The  national  administration  of 
the  land.  F.  L.  Soper.  Westm.  Review,  Oct.,  1889.  3.  The  national- 
ization of  the  land  :  a  reply.  Westm.  Review,  Jan.,  1890. 

Ethics  of  Land  Tenure.  J.  B.  Clark.  International  Journal  of  Ethics , 
Philadelphia,  Oct.,  1890. 

The  Reader's  Guide  prefaces  its  bibliography  of  public  finance  with  the 
following  note  : 

"The  first  authority  on  American  taxation  is  Weils,  whose  reports  are  invaluable. 
Ely's  and  Seligman's  monographs  deserve  high  commendation.  The  works  of  Dowell 
and  Noble  are  the  best  English  contributions  to  the  literature  of  public  finance.  Pres. 
E.  B.  Andrews  prescribes  the  following  course  for  a  student  :  Cossa's  Taxation,  then 
Marzano.  From  him,  being  now  ready  for  a  real  comprehension  of  the  subject,  he 
could  proceed  to  the  third  volume  of  Schonberg's  Handbuch  der  politischen  Oekonomie. 
Thence,  to  enrich  his  view  by  fresh  and  large  exposition,  joined  with  abundant  histori- 
cal application,  he  might  pass  to  Cohn.  He  could  then  advance  to  Roscher,  Wagner, 
Stein,  and  Leroy-Beaulieu." 

Under  the  head  of  Revenue  and  Taxation,  these  books  are  recom- 
mended : 

Adams,  C.  F.,  Jr.,  Williams,  W.  H.,  and  Oberly,  J.  H.  Taxation 
of  Railroads  and  Railroad  Securities.  N.  Y.,  Railroad  Gazette,  1880. 
49  pp.  D.  50  c. 

Reports  on  the  systems  of  railroad  taxation  in  the  several  States  of  the  United 
States,  also  in  Austria,  British  America,  Belgium,  England,  France,  Germany,  Hol- 
land, Hungary,  Russia,  Switzerland. 

Adams,  H.  CARTER.  Taxation  in  the  United  States,  1789-1816. 
Baltimore,  Johns  Hopkins  Univ.  Historical  Series,  1884.  79pp.  O.  pap.  500. 

Andrews,  G.  H.,  Commissioner  of  Taxes.  Twelve  Letters  on  the 
Future  of  New  York.  N.  Y.,  1877.  O. 

These  papers  and  Mr.  Minot's  contain  valuable  information  respecting  the  in- 
equalities and  inefficiencies  cf  the  systems  of  local  taxation  now  existing  in  this  coun- 
try, with  more  particular  reference  to  those  of  Massachusetts  and  New  York.  They 
cannot  be  easily  purchased,  but  can  usually  be  obtained  for  reference. 

Bolles  ALBERT  S.  Financial  History  of  the  United  States.  N.  Y., 
Homans  Pub.  Co.  3  v.  O.  V.  I.  1774-89,  371  p.  $2.50.  V.  2,  1789- 
1860,  621  pp.  $3.50.  V.  3,  1861-85,  585  pp.  $3  50. 

Defective  in  method  and  arrangement.  Contains  some  statistics  not  to  be  found  in 
convenient  shape  elsewhere. 

15 


226  WHO  PAYS  YOUR  TAXES? 

Bourne,  E.  G.  History  of  the  Surplus  Revenue  of  1837.  Questions 
of  the  Day,  No.  24.  N.  Y.,  Putnam,  1885.  161  p.  D.  $1.25. 

Shows  the  disasters  which  resulted  from  distributing  among  the  States  a  surplus  of 
$40,000,000  from  the  Federal  treasury. 

Burroughs,  W.  H.  Law  of  Taxation.  N.  Y.,  Baker,  Voorhis,  &  Co. 
1877.  O.  shp.  $6.50;  supplement  to  1883,  $2.50. 

Offers  to  the  student  or  the  lawyer  full  information  on  the  laws  of  taxation  in  the 
United  States,  Federal,  State,  and  municipal,  with  reviews  and  citations  of  court  de- 
cisions. 

Canfield,  JAMES  H.  Taxation.  Economic  Tract,  No.  9.  N.  Y.  Soc.  for 
Political  Education,  1883.  48  pp.  D.  pap.  15  c. 

Cooley,  T.  M.  Law  of  Taxation,  including  the  Law  of  Local 
Assessments.  2d  ed.,  enl.  Chicago,  Callaghan  &  Co.,  1886.  88  +  991  pp. 

o.  $7.50- 

Crocker,  G.  G.  Exposition  of  the  Double  Taxation  of  Personal 
Property  in  Massachusetts.  Boston,  1885.  15  pp.  O.  pap. 

Davies,  JULIEN  T.,  comp.  System  of  Taxation  in  the  State  of  New 
York.  Troy,  1888.  in +494  pp.  O. 

Constitutional  provisions,  statutes,  and  cases  relating  thereto. 

Ely,  R.  T.,  and  Finley,  J.  H.  Taxation  in  American  States  and 
Cities.  N.  Y.,  T.  Y.  Crowell  &  Co.,  1888.  544  pp.  D.  $1.75. 

A  popular  work  describing  taxation  as  it  is,  with  suggestions  for  reform.  Presents 
much  illustrative  information.  Holds  that  a  referendum  should  decide  proposed  loans 
m  cities.  Pp.  94-101  give  a  bibliography  of  taxation. 

Ensley,  ENOCH.  The  Tax  Question  :  what  should  be  taxed,  and  how 
it  should  be  taxed.  Nashville,  1873.  27  PP-  O.  pap. 

Gcuge,  W.  M.  Fiscal  History  of  Texas.  Phila.,  Lippincott,  1852. 
327  pp.  O. 

An  interesting  chapter  in  American  financial  history.  The  errors  of  older  com- 
munities were  repeated  with  disastrous  results. 

Hilliard,  FRANCIS.  The  Law  of  Taxation.  Bost.,  Little,  Brown  & 
Co.,  1875.  O.  $6. 

Jones,  W.  H.  Federal  Taxes  and  State  Expenses.  Questions  of  the 
Day,  No.  39.  N.  Y.,  Putnam,  1887.  135  PP-  D-  $*• 

Kearny,   J.     Sketch   of  American    Finance,    1789-1836.   N.    Y., 

Putnam,  1887.      160  pp.  D.  $x. 

Minot,  W.,  JR.  Taxation  in  Massachusetts.  Bost.,  A.  Williams  & 
Co.,  1877.  O.  pap.  25  c. 

Quincy,  JOSIAH  P.  Double  Taxation  in  Massachusetts.  Boston, 
Houghton,  Mifflin  &  Co.,  1889.  24  pp.  O.  pap. 

Reports  on  Taxation  from  Consuls  of  the  United  States.  Consular 
Reports,  Nos.  99  and  100.  Washington,  Gov.  Pr.  Office,  1888.  791  pp.  O. 

Schwab,   J.   CHRISTOPHER.     History  of  the  New  York  Property 

Tax:  an  introd.  to  the  History  of  State  and  Local  Finance  in  New  York. 
Baltimore,  American  Economic  Assoc.,  1890.     108  pp.  O.  $i. 


APPENDIX. 


227 


Seligman,  E.  R.  A.  Finance  Statistics  of  the  American  Common- 
wealths. Boston,  American  Statistical  Assoc.,  1889.  120  pp.  O.  pap.  f  i. 

Seligman;  E.  R.  A.  General  Property  Tax..  N.  Y.,  Ginn  &  Co., 
1890.  40  pp.  O.  pap.  40  c. 

Reprinted  from  Political  Science  Quarterly •,  March,  1890.  Gives  2  pp.  American 
bibliography — reports,  pamphlets,  and  monographs. 

Seligmaiij  E.  R.  A.  Taxation  of  Corporations.  N.  Y.,  Ginn  &  Co., 
1890.  1 10  pp.  O.  pap.  75  c. 

Reprinted  from  Political  Science  Quarterly,  June,  Sept.,  Dec.,  1890.  Fully  dis- 
cusses the  general  subject  of  double  taxation.  Contains  a  bibliography. 

Shaw,  ALBERT,  ed.  The  National  Revenues.  Chicago,  A.  C.  Mc- 
Clurg  &  Co.,  1888.  245  pp.  S.  $i. 

Contains  Protective  Tariffs  as  a  Question  of  National  Economy,  by  Prof.  W.  W. 
Folvyell ;  Surplus  Financiering,  by  Prof.  H.  C.  Adams  ;  The  Tariff  and  Trusts— Ex- 
penditures for  Internal  Improvements,  by  Prof.  R.  T.  Ely  ;  Shall  the  Internal  Revenue 
be  Retained  ?  by  Prof.  R.  M.  Smith  ;  A  Defence  of  the  Protective  Policy,  by  Prof. 
R.  E.  Thompson;  The  Readjustment  of  the  Revenues,  by  Prof.  E.  R.  A.  Seligman; 
The  Theory  and  Practice  of  Protection,  by  Prof.  Jesse  Macy  ;  The  Certainties  of  the 
Tariff  Question,  by  Prof.  J.  B.  Clark;  Taxation  and  Appropriation,  by  Prof.  Woodrow 
Wilson;  Equality  in  Taxation  — Commercial  Union  with  Canada,  by  Prof.  A.  D. 
Morse  ;  Steamship  Subsidies  as  a  Means  of  Reducing  the  Surplus,  by  Prof.  A.  T.  Had- 
ley ;  Protection  and  American  Agriculture,  by  Pres.  F.  A.  Walker  :  The  Tariff  and  the 
Western  Farmer,  by  Prof.  J.  H.  Canfield  ;  International  Taxation  and  a  Revenue 
Tariff,  by  Prof.  A.  Jaeger ;  A  Plan  of  Tariff  Reduction,  by  Prof.  E.  W.  Bemis  ;  Wages 
and  the  Tariff,  by  Prof.  J.  L.  Laughlin;  The  Scientific  Basis  of  Tariff  Legislation,  by 
Carroll  D.  Wright ;  Statistical  tables  are  appended. 

Sherman,  I.  Exclusive  Taxation  of  Real  Estate  and  the  Franchises 
of  a  few  specified  moneyed  Corporations  and  Gas  Companies.  N.  Y.,  1875. 

Sherman,  J.  Speeches  and  Reports  on  Finance  and  Taxation  from 
1859  to  1878.  N.  Y.,  Appleton,  1879.  8%  $2.50. 

Sumner,  W.  G.  Life  of  Alexander  Hamilton.  N.  Y.,  Dodd,  Mead 
&  Co.,  1890.  10  +  281  pp.  D.  75  c. 

Has  special  reference  to  his  financial  measures. 

Thompson,  R.  E.  Relief  of  Local  and  State  Taxation  through 
Distribution  of  the  National  Surplus.  Phila.,  E.  Stern  &  Co.,  1883. 
O.  28  pp.  pap.  25  c. 

What  Shall  We  Do  With  It?  (meaning  the  surplus.)  N.  Y.,  Harper, 
1888.  D.  68  pp.  pap.  25  c. 

Contains  President  Cleveland's  message  to  Congress,  Dec.  6,  1887,  under  title 
"Taxation  and  Revenue  discussed  ;"  together  with  the  letter  of  Hon.  J.  G.  Blaine  and 
articles  by  Hon.  G.  F.  Edmunds  and  H.  Watterson. 

Wells,  DAVID  A.  First  and  Second  Reports  of  the  Commissioners 
appointed  to  revise  the  Laws  for  the  Assessment  and  Collection  of  Taxes  in 
New  York,  1871  and  1872.  Albany,  Argus  Co.  154,  102  pp.  O. 

Contains  some  of  the  best  discussions  of  taxation  published  in  America.  The 
former  was  published  in  8vo.,  N.  Y.,  1871,  50  cents.  The  latter  is  out  of  print  in  this 
country,  but  editions  have  been  published  in  England  and  in  France,  in  the  latter 
country  by  the  government. 

Wells,  DAVID  A.  Special  Commissioner  of  the  Revenue,  ist, 
2d,  and  3d  Annual  Reports  with  Appendices.  Washington,  Treasury 
Department,  1867-69.  233  pp.  O. 


228  WHO  PAYS  YOUR   TAXES? 

Worthington,  T.  K.  Historical  Sketch  of  the  Finances  of  Penn- 
sylvania, Baltimore.  American  Economist  Association,  1887.  108  pp.  O. 
75  c. 

Baxter,  R.  D.  Taxation  of  the  United  Kingdom.  London,  Mac- 
millan,  1869.  O.  43.  6d. 

A  work  now  out  of  print,  and  obtainable  only  in  the  larger  libraries.  It  gives  an 
analysis  of  British  taxation,  and  discusses  with  great  ability  some  of  the  most  import- 
ant questions  in  connection  with  the  subject. 

Buchanan,  DAVID.  Inquiry  into  the  Taxation  and  Commercial 
Policy  of  Great  Britain.  Edinburgh,  W.  Tait,  1844.  340  pp.  O. 

Dowell,  STEPHEN.  History  of  Taxation  and  Taxes  in  England, 
from  the  earliest  times  to  the  present  day.  2d.  ed.  rev.  Lond.  and  N.  Y., 
Longmans,  1885.  4  v.  O.  $15. 

The  best  work  on  the  subject. 

Fawcett,  H.  Indian  Finance.  Lond.,  Macmillan,  1880.  187  pp.  O. 
7s.  6d. 

Gladstone,  W.  E.  Financial  Statements  of  1853,  1860,  1863. 
Lond.,  Murray,  1863.  462  pp.  O. 

Includes  also  a  speech  on  Tax  bills,  1861,  and  on  Charities,  1863. 

Goschen,    G.    J.      Reports    and    Speeches    on    Local    Taxation. 

London,  Macmillan,  1872.     218  pp.  O.  55. 

In  many  respects  the  ablest  English  work  on  the  topic. 

Local  Government  and  Taxation.  Lond.  and  N.  Y.,  Cassell,  1875. 
O.  $2. 

A  series  of  Essays  published  by  the  Cobden  Club  presents  a  good  exposition  of 
the  systems  of  taxation  in  countries  other  than  England  and  the  United  States — namely, 
Scotland,  Ireland,  Australia,  Holland,  Belgium,  France,  Russia,  and  Spain. 

McOulloch,  J.  R.  Taxation  and  the  Funding  System.  3d  ed. 
Lond.,  1863.  O. 

This  was  the  best  work  on  the  subject,  but  is  now  only  of  historical  value.  It  is 
now  out  of  print,  but  can  be  referred  to  in  the  larger  libraries. 

Noble,  J.  Local  Taxation,  a  criticism  of  fallacies  and  a  summary  of 
facts.  Lond.,  H.  S.  King  &  Co.,  1876.  O. 

Noble,  J.  The  Queen's  Taxes  ;  an  inquiry  into  the  amount,  incidence, 
and  economic  results  of  the  taxation  of  the  United  Kingdom.  Lond., 
Longmans,  1873.  O.  3s.  6d. 

Now  out  of  print ;  the  larger  public  libraries  have  it. 

Northcote,  Sir  STAFFORD  II.  Twenty  Years  of  Financial  Policy 
(1843-1861).  Lond.,  Saunders,  Otley  &  Co.,  1862.  16  +  399  pp.  O.  143. 

A  summary  of  the  chief  financial  measures  of  Great  Britain  passed  between  1842 
and  1861,  with  a  table  of  budgets. 

Palgrave,  R.  H.  I.  Local  Taxation  in  Great  Britain  and  Ireland. 
Lond.,  Murray,  1871.  124 pp.  O.  53. 

Peto,  Sir  S.  MORTON.  Taxation,  Its  Levy  and  Expenditure.  Lond., 
Chapman  &  Hall,  1863.  418  pp.  O.  xos.  6d. 


APPENDIX.  229 

Tennant,  C.     The  People's  Blue  Book.     Taxation  as  it  is  and  as  it 

ought  to  be.     4th  ed.     Lond.,  Longmans,  1872.     D.   75.  6d. 

Very  complete  in  respect  to  the  tax  laws  of  Great  Britain  and  their  administration, 
and  also  discusses  in  a  very  readable  and  generally  correct  manner  the  facts  of  taxa- 
tion. Not  a  scientific  book,  however. 

Wilson,  A.  J.  The  National  Budget  :  The  National  Debt,  Taxes, 
and  Rates.  English  Citizen  series.  Lond.  and  N.  Y.,  Macmillan,  1882 
176  pp.  D.  $i. 

In  small  compass  gives  a  view  of  the  whole  English  system  of  taxation. 

Wright,  R.  S.,  and  Hobhouse,  H.  Outline  of  Local  Government 
and  Local  Taxation  in  England  and  Wales.  Lond.,  W.  Maxwell  & 
Son,  1884.  130  pp.  O.  5s. 

London  is  excluded.     Some  considerations  for  amendment  are  presented. 

Bonnet,  VICTOR.  La  question  des  impots.  Paris,  Guillaumin,  1879. 
8  +  230  pp.  S. 

De  Flaix,  E.  FOURNIER.     Traite  de  critique  et  de  statistique  com- 

paree  des  institutions  finarcieres,  systemes  des  impotes,  et  reformes  fiscales 
des  divers  etats  au  XlXme  siecle.  ime  tome.  Paris,  Guillaumin,  1889. 
56  +  587  pp.  O. 

Denis,  H.  L'impot.  ime  serie.  Bruxelles,  Veuve  Mounom,  1889. 
309  pp.  8°,  25  plates. 

To  be  completed  in  a  second  volume.    An  excellent  work. 

De  Parieu,  F.  E.  Histoire  des  impots  generaux  sur  la  propriete  et 
le  revenu.  Paris,  Guillaumin,  1856.  339  pp.  D. 

A  general  sketch  of  direct  taxation  in  the  principal  nations. 

De  Parieu,  F.  E.  Traite  des  impots.  4  tomes.  Paris,  Guillaumin, 
1866-67.  17  +  522,  516,  522,  500  pp.  D. 

Deserves  high  commendation. 

Guyot,  YVES.  L'impot  sur  le  revenu.  Paris,  Guillaumin,  1887.  347 
pp.  D  3.50  francs. 

Discusses  in  a  most  attractive  style  direct  and  indirect  taxation.  The  author  is  a 
practical  statesman  as  well  as  an  eminent  economist. 

Leroy-Beaulieu,  PAUL.     Traite  des  science  des  finances.     4me  ed. 

corr.  et  aug.  ime  tome.  Des  revenus  publics.  Paris,  Guillaumin,  1888. 
26  +  791  pp.  D. 

The  best  French  work.    Replete  with  learning  and  research. 

Menier,  A.  L'impot  sur  le  capital.  Paris,  Guillaumin,  1874.  642 
pp.  O. 

Say,  LEON,  ed.  Dictionnaire  des  finances.  Paris,  Berger-Levrault  & 
Cie. 

Eminent  collaborators  are  engaged  on  this  work.  Begun  1883,  to  be  completed  in 
25  pts.  in  1891.  3.50  fr.  per  pt. 

Say,  LEON.    Les  solutions  democratiques  de  la  question  des  impots. 

Paris,  Guillaumin,  1886.     2  tomes,  260,  299  pp.  S. 

An  incisive  criticism  of  proposals  to  use  the  taxing  power  to  equalize  the  fortunes  of 


230 


WHO   PAYS   YOUR   TAXES? 


Vignes,  E  :  Traite  des  impots  en  France.  2  tomes.  Paris,  Guil- 
laumin,  1880.  5  +  556,  499  pp.  D. 

Cohn,  GUSTAV.  Finanzwissenschaft.  Stuttgart,  F.  Enke,  1889.  804 
pp.  D. 

Vol.  2  of  his  system.  This  vol.  consists  of  an  introd.  and  4  pts.  Of  these  the  -26.  and 
3d  are  the  most  interesting  ;  they  describe  the  present  system  of  taxation  in  the  Ger- 
man Empire,  and  set  forth  the  author's  doctrine  of  taxation.  Professor  Cohn  writes 
judiciously,  and  with  much  less  of  confidence  than  certain  of  his  compeers. 

Held,  ADOLPH.  Die  Einkommensteuer.  Bonn,  A.  Marcus,  1872. 
12 +  354  pp.  D. 

Hock,  C.  F.  von.  Die  offentlichen  Abgaben  und  Schulden.  Stutt- 
gart, Cotta,  1863.  11  +  381  pp.  D. 

Kaizl,    JOSEF.      Die  Lehre  von  der  Ueberwalzung  der  Steuern. 

Leipzig,  Duncker&  Humblot,  1882.     8+131  pp.  D. 
Excellent  history  of  the  doctrines  of  incidence  of  taxation. 

Meyer,  ROBERT.  Principien  der  gerechten  Besteuerung,  Berlin, 
W:  Hertz,  1884.  9  +  413  pp.  D. 

Neumann,  F.  T.  Progressive  Einkommensteuer.  Leipzig,  Duncker 
&  Humblot,  1874.  238  pp.  D. 

Roscher,  W  :  System  der  Finanzwissenschaft :  ein  Hand-und  Lese- 
buch  fur  Geschaftsmanner  und  Studierende.  3d  ed.  enl.  Stuttgart,  J.  G. 
Cotta,  1886.  783  pp.  D.  12  marks. 

V.  4  of  his  Economic  System.     An  excellent  treatise  on  methods  of  national  finance. 

Schaeffle,  A.  E.  F.  Die  Grundsatze  der  Steuerpolitik.  Tubingen, 
1880.  659  pp.  D. 

Schanz,  G.  Die  Steuern  der  Schweiz  in  ihrer  Entwickelung  seit 
Beginn  des  19  Jahrhunderts.  Stuttgart,  Cotta,  1890.  5  v. 

A  history  of  taxation  in  Switzerland  duriner  this  century,  of  special  value  to  the 
student,  from  Switzerland's  diversity,  geographically,  ethnologically,  and  politically. 

Stein,  LORENZ  von.  Finanzwissenschaft.  Leipzig,  Brockhaus,  1886. 
2  v.  D. 

Vocke,  W.  Die  Abgaben,  Auflagen  und  die  Steuer,  vom  Stand- 
punkte  der  Geschichte  und  der  Sittlichkeit.  Stuttgart,  J.  G.  Cotta,  1887. 
24  +  625  pp  O.  10  marks. 

A  philosophical  treatise  on  taxation. 

Vocke,  W.  Geschichte  der  Steuern  des  Britischen  Reiches.  Leip- 
zig, A.  Felix,  1866.  642  pp.  O. 

In  some  respects  better  than  Dowell's  History. 

Wagner,  ADOLPH.  Finanzwissenschaft.  3  v.  Leipzig,  C.  F.  Winter. 
V.  i,  3ded.,  1883.  V.  2,  2d  ed.,  1890.  V.  3.  1889. 

"The  most  comprehensive  work  on  taxation  in  any  language.  As  yet  uncompleted." 

Allessio,  GIULIO.  Saggio  sul  sistema  tributario  in  Italia  e  sui  suoi 
effeti  economici  e  sociali.  Torino,  Fratelli  Bocca,  1887.  2  v.  393, 
1007  pp.  O. 

The  best  treatise  on  Italian  taxation. 


APPENDIX.  231 

Cossa,  LUTGI.  Primi  element!  di  scienza  delle  finanze.  3d  ed., 
corr.  ed.  ace.  Milano,  Ulrico  Hoepli,  1882.  200  pp.  S. 

Cossa,  LUIGI.  Taxation,  Its  Principles  and  Methods ;  with  an  in- 
trod.  and  notes  by  Horace  White.  N.  Y.,  Putnam,  1888.  213  pp.  D.  $i. 

Clear  in  definition,  simple  in  statement,  comprehensive  in  classification.  The 
editor's  notes  discuss  from  the  American  point  of  view  the  taxation  of  personal  prop- 
erty, of  mortgages,  corporations,  land  values,  and  taxes  on  consumption  ;  and  present 
the  progressive  tax  system  which  has  been  in  force  in  the  city  of  Basle,  Switzerland, 
for  fifty  years.  The  appendix  describes  the  tax  systems  of  New  York  and  Pennsylvania. 
A  bibliography  is  given. 

Marzano,  F.  Compendio  di  scienza  delle  finanze.  Turin,  1887. 
2d  ed.,  360  pp. 

"  As  a  sketch  of  finance,  connected,  well-written,  and  sufficiently  full  for  a  first  view. 
It  is  the  best  single  treatise  within  my  knowledge."— .£".  B.  Andrews, 

Mazzola    UGO.     I  dati  scientific!  della  finanza  pubblica.     Rome, 

Loescher,  1890.     217  pp.  8°,  5  francs. 

"  One  of  the  brightest,  deepest,  and  most  original  among  the  numerous  writings  on 
economics  which  Italy  has  produced  in  recent  years." — E.  B.  Andrews. 

Pantaleoni,  MAFFEO.  Teoria  della  translazione  dei  tributi.  Rome, 
A.  Paolina,  1882.  355  pp.  O. 

A  capital  treatise  on  the  incidence  of  taxation. 

Besides  the  N.  Y.  Reports  of  D.  A.  Wells  see  also  Report  of  the  Mary- 
land Tax  Commission,  Baltimore,  1888  ;  Report  of  the  [Massachusetts] 
Commissioners  appointed  to  inquire  into  the  expediency  of  revising  and 
amending  the  laws  relating  to  taxation  and  exemption  therefrom,  Boston, 
1875  ;  Report  of  the  Revenue  Commission  [of  Illinois],  Springfield,  1886  ; 
Report  of  the  Tax  Commissioners  of  Connecticut,  Hartford,  1887  ;  and 
Report  of  the  Special  Tax  Commissioners  of  Maine.  Augusta,  1890. 

For  a  statement  of  the  curious  system  of  taxation  existing  in  Mexico, 
and  its  influence  on  the  trade  and  industries  of  that  country,  see  David  A. 
Wells's  Study  of  Mexico.  N.  Y.,  Appleton,  1887. 

In  David  A.  Wells's  Practical  Economics  is  a  chapter  on  the  Taxation 
of  Distilled  Spirits,  describing  one  of  the  most  interesting  experiences  of 
the  U.  S.  Internal  Revenue  Department. 

In  South  Kensington,  R.  I.,  two  town  meetings  are  held  ;  one  of  all 
citizens,  the  other  of  all  taxpayers  only,  who  alone  have  a  right  to  vote  to 
impose  taxes  or  upon  expenditures  of  money.  The  list  of  the  latter  is  given 
in  the  Town's  Year  Book,  published  at  Wakefield,  R.  I. 

Historical  and  Comparative  Science  of  Finance,  by  Prof.  E.  R.  A. 
Seligman,  is  in  preparation  for  the  series  in  Systematic  Political  Science,  by 
the  University  Faculty  of  Political  Science.  Columbia  College,  N.  Y. 

The  Financial  Reform  Almanac  (Lond.,  Simpkin,  Marshall  &  Co.,  is.) 
contains  important  statistics  with  arguments  for  reform  in  taxation. 

The  Treasury  Department,  Washington,  publishes  an  annual  report  of 
the  receipts  and  expenditures  of  the  United  States. 

Valuation  and  Taxation  of  Real  and  Personal  Property  in  the  United 
States,  by  states,  counties,  cities,  etc.,  for  1880,  is  given  in  Vol.  7,  Census 
Reports,  Tenth  Census.  Washington,  Government  Pr.  Office,  1884.  909 
pp.  Q. 


232  WHO  PAYS    YOUR   TAXES? 

Agriculture  and  the  Single  Tax.  Horace  White.  Popular  Science 
Monthly,  Feb.,  1890. 

Bases  of  Taxation.    F.  A.  Walker.     Political  Science  Quarterly.  March 
1888. 

Income  and  Property  Taxes  in  Switzerland.  Gustav  Cohn,  Political 
Science  Quarterly,  March,  1889. 

Single  Tax  Debate.  S.  B.  Clarke,  Prof.  T.  Davidson,  W.  L.  Garrison, 
Prof.  J.  B.  Carle,  Pres.  E.  B.  Andrews,  Prof,  E.  R.  A.  Seligman,  I,.  F. 
Post,  E.  Atkinson,  H.  George,  Prof.  W.  T.  Harris  and  James  R.  Garret. 
Journal  of  the  American  Social  Science  Assoc.,  No.  27.  Saratoga  papers  of 
1890.  N.  Y.,  Putnam,  1890.  53-127  p.  O.  $1. 

Taxation  of  Labor.  C.  B.  Spahr.  Political  Science  Quarterly,  Sept., 
1886. 

The  Direct  Tax  of  1861.  C.  F.  Dunbar.  Quarterly  Journal  of  Econom- 
ics, July,  1889. 

The  Single  Tax.  H.  George  and  E.  Atkinson.  Century  Magazine,  July, 
1890. 

The  Tobacco  Tax,  1864-90.  F.  L.  Olmsted.  Quarterly  Jownal  oj 
Economics,  Jan . ,  1891. 


INDEX. 


Advertiser,  Geneva,  193 

Aldrich,  S.,  157,  158 

Alliance  Leader,  attack  of,  on  Tax 
Reform  Association,  193,  194 

Andrews,  G.  H.,  on  future  of  New 
York  City,  66-75  ;  on  inequali- 
ties of  taxation  in  N.  Y.  94- 
102;  quotation  from  speech,  119, 
120  ;  reference  to  address  of,  on 
taxation,  218 

Arnoux,  W.  H.,  48,  50,  51,  52,  57, 
58,  60 

Assessment,  under-valuation  in,  46, 
47  ;  of  property  in  New  York,  in 
1869  and  1883,  54,  55  ;  curious 
method  of,  in  Rhode  Island,  85  ; 
of  personal  property,  deduction  of 
debt  in,  91 ;  in  Ohio  what  it  proves, 
106,  107;  difficulty  of,  in  case  of 
personal  property,  109,  no  ;  in 
urban  and  rural  counties  in  Ohio 
compared,  111-119  I  instance  of 
widow's  personal  property,  I2O, 
121 ;  system  urged  by  Marlborough 
Record,  194 

Assessor's  oath,  in  New  York,  47 

Bank    of    England,  how   it    collects 

income  tax,  202 
Baxter,  R.  D.,  on  income  tax,  138 


Beach,  J.  N.,  remarks  in  opposition 
to  listing  system,  163 

Bel  ford's  Magazine,  127 

Bemis,  E.  W.,  attitude  on  tax  re- 
form, 170,  171 

Board  of  Trade  and  Transportation, 
50 

Board  of  Trade,  its  proposed  tax 
commission  in  1890,  153,  154 

Bonds,  U.  S.,  their  relation  to  per- 
sonal property  tax,  90,  91 

Bowker,  R.  R.,  157,  158 

Brooklyn,  taxes  and  assessments, 
28  ;  House  Owners'  League,  154 

Brown,  Gov.,  of  Tennessee,  75 

Brunner,  J.  H.,  correspondence 
with,  174-176 

California,  failure  of  attempt  to  tax 
personal  property  in,  121,  122 

Camp,  H.  N.,  157,  158 

Capital,  its  flight  before  taxation, 
72,  186,  187 

Carroll  Co.,  Ohio,  in 

Chamber  of  Commerce,  32 

Chapin,  A.  L.,  2 

Charity,  17;  relation  to  taxation,  20, 
22,  24 

Christensen,  C.  T.,  157,  158 

Claflin,  John,  158 


234 


INDEX. 


Coleman,  Michael,  on  Andrews  in 
relation  to  personal  tax,  94;  on 
taxing  away  capital,  186 

"  Collar-button  system,"  why  so 
called,  48 

Colleges,  correspondence  with,  164- 
184  ;  note  of  professors'  attitude 
on  tax  reform,  203-207 

College  of  New  Jersey,  183 

Columbia  College,  65,  182 

County  option  in  taxation,  37  ;  pro- 
posed bill  in  1890,  154 ;  A.  R. 
Eno  on,  155 

Customs  duties,  13 

Cuyahoga  County,  Ohio,  in 

Daily  Union,  of  Schenectady,  on  tax 

reform,  196 
Davies,   Julien  T.,  on   abolition  of 

personal  property  tax,  81-102  ;  on 

single  tax,  101,  102 
Democrat,  of  Ithaca,  N.  Y.,  opposed 

to  tax  reform,  194,  195 
Denning,  E.  J.,  157 
Direct  taxation,  a  coming  necessity, 

128,  129 
"  Doctor,"    imaginary   character   in 

dialogue,  216,  217 
Dog  tax,  17,  1 8 
Dduble   taxation,    an    instance    of, 

198,  199 

Drayton,  J.  C.,  159 
Dyckman,  J.  M.,  157,  158 

Elections  of   1890,   how  influenced 

by  women,  148 
Eliot,  Charles  W.,  commending  tax 

reform,  184 
Ellis,  G.  W.,  62 
Ely,  R.  T.,  63,  64  ;  attitude  toward 

tax  reform,  182,  183 


Ely,  Smith,  157,  158 

Eno,  A.  R.,  letter  on  taxation,  154- 

156  ;    signer  of    tax   reform    call, 

157 ;    referred   to    in    newspaper, 

158      * 
Ensley,  Enoch,  on  tax  question,  75- 

78 

Erwin  bill,  153 
Evening  Journal,  Jamestown,  N.Y., 

favoring  tax  reform,  195 
Evening  Star,  of  Greenbush,  N.  Y., 

letter  to,  186-192 
Exemption    of     personal     property 

as  affording  relief  to  real  estate, 

77,  78 

Fairchild,  C.  F.,  159 

Farmers,  in  relation  to  personal 
taxes,  106-126  ;  personal  property 
of,  not  to  be  concealed,  118-120  ; 
why  they  should  oppose  personal 
property  tax,  188-192 

Fawcett,  H.,  on  income  tax,  201- 
203 

Federal  securities,  why  tax-free,  38 

Fellows,  W.  S.,  157,  158 

Franklin  County,  Ohio,  typical 
urban  county,  in 

Fresh  air  fund,   Tribune's,  21 

Future  of  New  York,  apropos  of  tax- 
ation, G.  H.  Andrews's  letters 
on,  66-75 

Gazette,  of  Reno,  Nev.,  63 
Gaunt,  J.,  157 

Geauga  County,  Ohio,  in,  116-118 
George,  Henry,  his  laws  of  taxation, 

6,  7 

Gladstone,  W.  E.,  offer  to  repeal 
income  tax,  135  ;  critic  of  income 
tax,  136 


INDEX. 


235 


Hadley,  A.  T.,  letter  commending 
tax  reform,  183 

Hamilton  County,  Ohio,  watch  as- 
sessment compared  with  that  of 
Geauga  County,  no  ;  typical  ur- 
ban county,  in  ;  assessment  com- 
pared with  Medina  County,  112, 
113  ;  real  estate,  money,  and 
credits  in,  as  compared  with 
Geauga  County,  114,  115  ;  watch, 
carriage,  and  money  and  credit 
tax  compared  with  that  of  Geauga, 
116-118 

Harvard  University,  184 

Hentz,  H.,  157 

Herald,  New  York,  comment  on  tax 
reform  movement,  193 

Hewitt,  A.  S.,  64 

Hiawassee  College,  174,  175 

Hibernian  Savings  &  Loan  Co.,  34 

Holmes,  J.  F.,  correspondence  on 
real  estate  taxation,  165,  166 

House  tax,  41. 

How,  H.  J.,  157,  158 

Howland,  H.  E.,  157 

Hurlbut,  H.  A.,  157,  158 

Income  tax,  objections  to,  7-9  ; 
house  tax  fair  equivalent,  41,  42  ; 
in  Great  Britain,  53  ;  Joseph 
Dana  Miller  on,  127-147;  kind 
likely  to  be  imposed,  129-131  ; 
discriminating  unfair,  129—131  ; 
Austria's,  131,  132  ;  Germany's, 
131 ;  graduated,  131  ;  Goldwin 
Smith  on,  131,  133  ;  Italy's,  132  ; 
England's,  132,  133;  J.  S.  Mill  on, 
133  ;  failure  of,  in  France,  133; 
instability  of,  134 ;  either  .war 
measure  or  alternative,  134;  Eng- 


land's historically  reviewed,  134- 
139  ;  under  Sir  S.  Northcote,  135,- 
Gladstone's  offer  to  repeal,  135  ; 
Sir  Robert  Peel  on,  136,  137 ; 
British  Inland  Commission's  re- 
port on,  137  ;  J,  R.  McCulloch 
on,  137  ;  R.  D.  Baxter  on,  138  ; 
effect  of  exemptions  in  U.  S., 
138 ;  L.  A.  Lathrop  on,  138,  139  ; 
argument  to  show  that  it  may  be 
shifted,  139-142;  better  than 
tariff,  142,  143  ;  in  campaign  of 
1876,  143,  144  ;  not  just  because 
levied  on  those  able  to  pay,  144  ; 
objections  to,  summed  up,  146  ; 
Rt.  Hon.  H.  Fawcett  on,  201- 
203  ;  how  collected  by  Bank  of 
England,  202 

Inequalities  of  taxation  in  New 
York,  G.  H.  Andrews' s  letters 
on,  94-102 

Inheritance  tax,  9,  10 

Inland  commissioners'  (British)  re- 
port on  income  tax,  137 

Inman,  J.  H.,  157 

Interest,  18 

"Jasper,"  imaginary    character    in 

dialogue,  197-199 
Jesup,  M.  K.,  159 
Johns  Hopkins  University,   63,  182 

King,  W.  F.,  report  on  opposition 
to  listing  bill,  160-163 

Land,  18  ;  originally  of  no  value,  42, 
43  ;  value  of,  dependent  on  pres- 
ence of  personal  property,  42,  43; 
G.  Opdyke  on  value  of,  44  ;  va- 
cant, value  of  easily  determined, 
46 


INDEX. 


Lathrop,  L.  A.,  on  income  tax,  138, 

139 

Law  committee  of  Philadelphia 
common  council,  report  of,  44,  45 

License  tax  analyzed  and  con- 
demned, 215-217 

Linson  bill,  27,  153 

Listing  bill,  37,  38,  48;  of  1884,  48- 
60  ;  of  1892,  49  ;  of  1891,  Sun's 
opinion  on,  60-62  ;  of  1890,  W. 
F.  King's  report  on  opposition 
to,  161-163 

Listing  system  in  Ohio,  63;  in 
various  States.  85,  86  ;  its  effect 
in  Connecticut,  156  ;  remarks  of 
J.  N.  Beach  in  opposition  to,  163 

Little-Thought,  Mr.,  letter  to,  200, 
201 

Livingston,  E.,  159 

Long  Islander,  on  tax  reform,  192, 
195,  196 

Low,  S.,  159 

Lucas  Countv,  Ohio,  typical  urban 
county,  in 

Lunatic,  instance  of  full  assessment 
of  personal  property,  121 

MacCracken,  H.  M.,  attitude  to- 
ward tax  reform,  158 

McCreery,  J.,  157,  158 

McCulloch,  J.  R.,  on  income  tax,  157 

McKinstry,  Justice,  34 

McVicar,  Peter,  correspondence 
with,  176,  177 

Massachusetts,  form  of  mortgage  in, 
34 

Medina  Co.,  Ohio,  in;  assessment 
compared  with  Hamilton  Co., 
TI2,  113 

Mill,  J.  S.,  41 ;  on  income  tax,  9,133 


Miller,  Joseph  Dana,  on  income  tax, 
127-147 

Mills,  I).  O.,  159 

Monroe  County,  Ohio,  HI 

Money  and  credit  taxation  in  Ohio, 
113-116 

Mortgage,  form  of,  in  Massachusetts, 
34  ;  title  guarantee  companies' 
form,  36,  37  ;  on  land,  defined, 
no  ;  on  farms,  where  obtained, 

190,  191 ;  tax  on,  paid  by  borrower, 

191,  197-199  ;  tax  on,   discussed 
by  Patriot,  Jackson,  Miss.,  195 

Murphy,  Senator,  51,   52 

Nevada,  64 

New  York,  assessors'  oath  in,  47  ; 
assessment  of  property  in  1869 
and  1883,  54,  55  ;  tax  laws  of,  82, 

83 
New  York  City,  its  future  apropos 

of  taxation,  66-75 
New  York  Financier,  comments  on 

tax  reform,  192,  193 
Noble  County,  Ohio,  HI 
Noble,    John,    on    "The    Queen's 

Taxes,"  137,  138 
Northcote,  Sir  S.,  income  tax  under, 

135 

Opdyke,   George,   remarks  on   land 

values,  44 
Ohio,    what   its   assessment   shows, 

106,  107  ;  auditor's  report,  what  it 

shows,    111-119 

Park  Bank,  28 
Parsons,  W.  H.,  48,  58 
Patriot,  Jackson,   Miss.,  on  taxing 
mortgages,  195 


INDEX. 


237 


Pauperism,  relation  of,  to  taxation 
and  charity,  15-24 

Peel,  Sir  R.,  on  income  tax,  136,  137 

Perjury,  as  encouraged  by  taxation 
of  personal  property,  100,  101, 
105,  106 

Personal  estate,  as  defined  by  New 
York  tax  laws,  82,  83  ;  debts  de- 
ducted from  assessment  on,  89  ; 
value  in  proportion  to  that  of  real 
estate,  94 

Personal  property,  tax  on,  unfair, 
10;  mostly  of  recent  origin,  84; 
early  ease  of  assessment,  85  ; 
methods  of  assessing,  85-102 ; 
proportion  to  real  in  New  York, 
92  ;  tax  on,  never  can  be  success- 
ful, 103  ;  difficulty  of  assessing, 
109,  no  ;  of  corporations,  what  it 
largely  consists  of,  no  ;  proportion 
to  real  in  urban  and  rural  counties 
of  Ohio,  111-118  ;  tax  on,  its 
failure  in  California,  121,  122  ;  in 
California,  its  disappearance  from 
assessment,  122-125;  defined,  rS8; 
why  farmers  should  oppose  tax 
on,  188-192  ;  tax  on,  its  effect  in 
increasing  prices,  189 

Petition,  Tax  Reform  Association's, 
of  1891,  27 

Poll  tax,  39 

Pope's  encyclical  on  labor,  23 

Potter,  O.  B.,  159 

Press,  note  on  attitude  toward  tax 
reform,  207-215 

Princeton  College,  183 

Principles,  Tax  Reform  Associa- 
tion's, 27,  155-157 

"  Queen's  Taxes,"  the,  by  John 
Noble,  137,  138 


Railroad  companies,  tax  on,  in  Cali- 
fornia, 122,  123 

Railroads,  increase  of  value,  in  Cali- 
fornia, 124 

Read,  G.  R.,  157 

Real  estate,  what  gives  it  value, 
187,  188,  199 

Real  Estate  Record  and  Guide,  on 
Tax  Reform  Association,  157,  158 

Record,  Marlborough,  N.  Y.,  urg- 
ing a  system  of  assessment,  194 

Rent,  18;  a  measure  of  payer's 
wealth,  41,  42 

Republican  Watchman,  comment  on 
tax  reform,  194 

Rhode  Island,  curious  method  of 
assessment  in,  85 

Richard,  A.,  157,  158 

Rogers,  A.  E.,  correspondence  with, 
176-181 

Rural  counties  in  Ohio,  assessment 
in,  compared  with  urban,  in- 
119 

"Saloon-keeper,"  imaginary  char- 
acter in  dialogue,  216,  217 

San  Francisco,  failure  of  attempt 
to  increase  its  taxes,  123,  124  ; 
failure  of  attempt  to  increase  tax 
of,  relative  to  the  rest  of  Califor- 
nia, 123-125 

Scott,  G.  A.,  157 

Seligman,  E.  R.  A.,  64 ;  attitude 
toward  tax  reform,  182 

Shearman,  T.  G.,  103,  157,  158 

Shepard,  J.  G. ,  opinion  on  tax  re- 
form principles,  166-168 

Siedler,  C.,  159 

Sinclair,  J.,  157,  158 

Single  Tax,  Julian  T.  Davies  on,  101, 
102;  proposal  of  Tax  Reform  As- 


INDEX. 


sociation  not  identical  with,  165, 
1 66 

Smith,  Adam,  5;  maxims  of  taxa- 
tion, 6 

Smith,  Goldwin,  on  income  tax,  131, 
132 

Steinway,  William,  157,  158 

Sturges,  Hon.  S.  B.,  63 

Sun,  New  York,  60,  62 

Tariff,  why  not  discussed  in  this 
volume,  13,  14;  reduction  and 
possible  abolition  of,  127,  128 

Taxation,  effect  on  pauperism,  15- 
24;  incidents  of,  44-47;  only  just 
system  of,  48;  of  capital,  drives 
the  latter  away,  72 ;  curious  forms 
of,  84 ;  inequalities  of  New  York 
system,  94-102  ;  local  option  in, 
102,  154;  "Taxation of  the  United 
Kingdom/'  by  R.  D.  Baxter,  138 

Taxes,  not  paid  for  protection,  4  ; 
why  collected,  5 

Tax  laws  of  Philadelphia,  78-80 

Tax  on  real  estate,  10-13;  on  cor- 
porate franchises,  13,  14;  on  dogs, 
17-18;  on  bonds,  stocks,  etc.,  28; 
on  indebtedness,  falls  on  bor- 
rower, 30;  on  mortgages,  30,  37; 
on  personal  property,  paid  by 
three  classes,  87,  88;  on  personal 
property,  how  evaded,  88-94  ;  on 
personal  property  in  Connectieut, 
96,  97;  on  pleasure  carriages  in 
some  counties  of  Ohio,  116;  on 
watches  in  some  counties  of  Ohio, 
116 ;  on  moneys  and  credits  in 
some  counties  of  Ohio,  117;  on 
telegraph  and  telephone  compa- 
nies in  California,  122,  123;  on 
corporations,  A.  R.  Eno,  154,  155; 


on  personal  property,  why  against 
interests  of  farmers,  189 

Tax  rate,  in  Albany,  27;  in  New 
York  City,  27;  in  Rochester,  27  ; 
in  Brooklyn,  28 

Tax  Reform  Association,  26;  origin 
of,  153-160 

"  Tax  Reformer,"  imaginary  char- 
acter in  dialogue,  197-199 

Tax  Revision  Commissioners  in  New 
York,  41 

Telegraph  companies,  tax  on  in 
California,  122,  123 

Telephone  companies,  tax  on  in 
California,  122,  123 

Tenements,  21 

Thompson,  R.  E.,  letter  on  tax  re- 
form, 182 

Thome,  S.,  157 

Thurber,  F.  B.,  157,  158 

Thurman  versus  Ryan,  Court's  utter- 
ance in,  91 

Tiffany,  C.  L.,  159 

Times,  New  York,  on  real  estate 
tax,  ii,  12;  on  Tax  Reform  As- 
sociation, 160,  161 

Title  guarantee  companies,  their 
form  of  mortgage,  36,  37 

Townsend,  R.  H.  L.,  157 

Troy  Herald^    criticised   by   Press, 

193 

Troy  Press,  opposition  to  personal 
property  tax,  193 

Undervaluation  in  assessments,  46, 

47 
United  States  bonds,  their  relation 

to  personal  property  tax,  90,  91 
Universities,    correspondence    with, 

164 


INDEX. 


239 


University  of  Virginia,  165,  166;  of 
Pennsylvania,  181;  of  the  city  of 
New  York,  183 

Unthank,  J.  B.,  on  tax  reform,  172, 
173;  letter  to,  173,  174. 

Vanderbilt,  C.,  159 
Vanderbilt  University,  170,  171 
Vedder,  Senator,  57,  58 

Wages,  law  of,  20 
Wallace,  Chief  Justice,  35 
Washburn  College,  176 
Wealth  tax,  proposed  as  substitute 
for  income  tax,  139 


Wells,  D.  A.,  2-4;  25,  105,  157; 
his  willingness  to  have  tax  com- 
missioners' report  revised  and  re- 
published,  217 

Widows,  instance  of  full  assessment 
of  personal  property,  120,  121 

Wilmington  College,  172,  173 

Wilson,  Woodrow,  letter  commend- 
ing tax  reform,  183 

Women,  their  influence  in  elections 
of  1890,  148;  their  concern  in  taxa- 
tion, 149-152;  their  property  easily 
traced,  150;  unjust  taxation  upon, 
I5L 

Yale  University,  183. 


STAMPED  BELOW 

AN  INITIAL  FINE  OF  25  CENTS 


67—  W«            WILL  BE  ASSESSED   FOR   FAILURE  TO   RETURN 
THIS   BOOK  ON   THE  DATE  DUE.   THE  PENALTY            ; 
WILL  INCREASE  TO  SO  CENTS  ON  THE  FOURTH 
DAY    AND    TO    $i.OO    ON    THE    SEVENTH     DAY 

64  —  Th«         OVERDUE.                                                                       :ean 

ar 

6s   A  : 

25 

L: 
66     Tin            I  LQEiJLC^C  IHSP 

25 
—  pital 

x  l                ^*  *• 

I  125 

67  —  riit  t-i  i  JM  —  n  1QCO 

£0           T->                                  J   U   1  M        0                    iwO&l 

Oo  —  rar 

i  50 
Ham 

an 
69  —  Moi                              ,£G;^V\W 

[    00 

i   nn 

70-The               ~~£W* 

75 

71  —  Wh  
SH                                                  1 

'•  25 

72~ine            JUL171Q5B                                25 

7^—  The                 *JUL>    l  <     \9&9                           P£S8 

*7A       Thf* 

:  50 

—  W 

74     i  ne  

75 

.  . 

75    A  B                          "-'    t«  ^ 

cri^f^  ••  t^    ... 

:  in 
DE 

co  —  f  £B  1  6  jggy 

76—1  ndu        Qp-r    ft  ^C    OHQ 

\                                                                                              AW 

TO  UW  1    2  °    LU 

75 

Pai 

75 

78—  Cans 
Fe. 

rial. 

79  —  Joint 

00 

go  —    Co:  

PIT. 

RY 

00 

81—  The 

Pap 

DN. 
20 

82—  A  So 

•p.. 

ed. 

By  
83—  Natu 
pap. 

75 

LD  21-100m-7,'33 
50 

84 — Real   Di-metamsm ;    or  True   Coin  versus    False   Coin.      By 

EVERETT  P.  WHEELER.     Illustrated.     Paper,  400.  ;  cloth      .         75 

85 — Congressional  Currency.     By  A.  C.  GORDON.     Cloth   .        .     i  25 

86 — Money  and  Prices.     By  J.   SCHOENHOF,  author  of  "  Economy  of 

High  Wages,"  etc.     Cloth i   50 


QUESTIONS    OF    THE    DAY. 

AUTHOR   INDEX    TO    THE 
"  QUESTIONS   OF  .THE    DAY "    SERIES. 


Alexander,  E.  P.,  No.  36 
Allen,  J.  H.,  No.  53 
Atkinson,  E.,  No.  40 
Bagehot,  W.,  No.  28 
Baker,  C.  W.,  No,  59 
Blair,  L.  H.,  No,  35 


Jacobi,  M.  P.,  No.  80 
Jones,  W.  H.,  No.  39 
Juglar,  C.,  No.  75 
Lawton,  G.  W.,  No.  25 
Lowell,  J,  S.,  Nos.  13,  70 
Lunt,  E.  C.,  No.  4. 


Bour 
Bowl 
Bruc 
Clevi 

Codr 

Co\v] 

Dabr 

Doni 

Dos 

Doug 

Dugc 

Eato 

Ehri< 


607537 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


Elliott.  J.  R.,  No.  62 
Foote,  A.  R.,  No.  82 
Ford,  W.  C.,  Nos.  5,  6 
Foulke,  W.  D.,  No.  43 
Giffen,  R.,  No.  20 
Gordon,  A.  C.,  No.  85 
Hall,  B.,  No.  71 
Hitchcock,  H.,  No.  37 


Strange,  D.,  No.  72 

Taussig,  F.  W.,  Nos.  47,  74 

"Tax-Payer,"  No.  55 

Tyler,  L.  G.,  No.  68 

Wells,  D.  A.,  Nos.  3,  54,  64,  71 

Wheeler,  E.  P.,  No.  84 

Winn,  H.,  No.  46 


G.  P.  PUTNAM'S  SONS,  PUBLISHERS, 


NEW    YORK  : 

27  &  29  West  Twenty-third  St. 


LONDON  : 
24  Bedford  Street,  Strand. 


